importance of research in culture

• SUGGESTED TOPICS
• The Magazine
• Newsletters
• Managing Yourself
• Managing Teams
• Work-life Balance
• The Big Idea
• Data & Visuals
• Reading Lists
• Case Selections
• HBR Learning
• Topic Feeds
• Account Settings
• Email Preferences

The New Analytics of Culture

• Matthew Corritore,
• Amir Goldberg,
• Sameer B. Srivastava

Culture is easy to sense but hard to measure. The workhorses of culture research—employee surveys and questionnaires—are often unreliable.

Studying the language that employees use in electronic communication has opened a new window into organizational culture. New research analyzing email, Slack messages, and Glassdoor postings are challenging prevailing wisdom about culture.

Some of the findings are (1) cultural fit is important, but what predicts success most is the rate at which employees adapt as organizational culture changes over time, (2) cognitive diversity helps teams during ideation but hinders execution, and (3) the best cultures encourage diversity to drive innovation but are anchored by shared core beliefs.

What email, Slack, and Glassdoor reveal about your organization

Idea in Brief

The problem.

Culture is easy to sense but difficult to measure. The workhorses of culture research—employee surveys and questionnaires—are often unreliable.

A New Approach

Studying the language that employees use in electronic communication has opened a new window into organizational culture. Research analyzing email, Slack messages, and Glassdoor postings is challenging prevailing wisdom about culture.

The Findings

• Cultural fit is important, but what predicts success most is the rate at which employees adapt as organizational culture changes over time.
• Cognitive diversity helps teams during ideation but hinders execution.
• The best cultures encourage diversity to drive innovation but are anchored by shared core beliefs.

A business’s culture can catalyze or undermine success. Yet the tools available for measuring it—namely, employee surveys and questionnaires—have significant shortcomings. Employee self-reports are often unreliable. The values and beliefs that people say are important to them, for example, are often not reflected in how they actually behave. Moreover, surveys provide static, or at best episodic, snapshots of organizations that are constantly evolving. And they’re limited by researchers’ tendency to assume that distinctive and idiosyncratic cultures can be neatly categorized into a few common types.

• MC Matthew Corritore is an assistant professor of strategy and organization at McGill’s Desautels Faculty of Management.
• AG Amir Goldberg is an associate professor of organizational behavior at Stanford’s Graduate School of Business. He and Sameer B. Srivastava codirect the Berkeley-Stanford Computational Culture Lab.
• SS Sameer B. Srivastava is an associate professor and the Harold Furst Chair in Management Philosophy and Values at the University of California, Berkeley’s Haas School of Business. He and Amir Goldberg codirect the Berkeley-Stanford Computational Culture Lab.

Partner Center

Research culture

The Royal Society’s research culture programme of work aims to embed a culture of research that will support the science community looking forward to 2035.

Research culture encompasses the behaviours, values, expectations, attitudes and norms of our research communities. It influences researchers’ career paths and determines the way that research is conducted and communicated. 

The UK has a long history of shaping global research culture, from the times of the Enlightenment scientists, the foundation of the Royal Society  and the frameworks of publishing and peer review, through to its recent leadership in championing science as an open enterprise .

Building on this history and the strengths of research culture today, the Royal Society has started Changing expectations , a programme of work to explore how the UK can promote the cultural conditions that will best enable excellent research and researchers here and elsewhere to flourish in the future . The focus of this programme is on the assessment of research and researchers, researcher career development, and open science. 

Watch the videos recorded throughout the Research Culture: Changing expectations conference.

Read more about research culture in our latest blog posts.

Changing expectations

Research culture: Changing expectations conference

Tools to support and steward research culture

Research system, culture and funding

The UK has a world-class research system, producing high quality science that contributes to the country’s economic growth while also tackling society’s biggest challenges. The funding of research, along with the culture it supports, needs to continually evolve if science is to be the best it can be.

Email updates

We promote excellence in science so that, together, we can benefit humanity and tackle the biggest challenges of our time.

Subscribe to our newsletters to be updated with the latest news on innovation, events, articles and reports.

What subscription are you interested in receiving? (Choose at least one subject)

• Feature Article

Research Culture: Setting the right tone

• Elizabeth Adams
• University of Glasgow, United Kingdom ;
• Open access
• Copyright information
• Comment Open annotations (there are currently 0 annotations on this page).
• 15,461 views
• 846 downloads
• 9 citations

Share this article

Cite this article.

• Tanita Casci
• Copy to clipboard
• Download BibTeX
• Download .RIS

Article and author information

Improving the research culture of an institution may lead to a fairer, more rewarding and successful environment, but how do you start making changes?

The University of Glasgow was founded more than 550 years ago and currently welcomes over 5000 researchers working in a wide range of subjects across the sciences and the humanities. Feedback suggests that our research culture is already good, but we think that it could be even better. As the Head of Research Policy (TC) and the Researcher Development Manager (EA), we have spent the past few years working to update research culture at Glasgow. Based on our experiences, our advice to anyone trying to change the culture of their institution is to be practical, consistent, and to aim for progress, not perfection. Start even if you cannot see the end. The project is big, slow, fragmented: and yes, it is a fantasy to imagine that a university has, or should have, a single culture.

The recent research culture survey by the Wellcome Trust has highlighted what many of us would not dispute: that the pursuit of a narrow definition of research excellence, and of excellence at any cost, has limited the research endeavour and had an adverse impact on the wellbeing of researchers as well as the quality and reliability of the research they undertake. It is not too late to fix this issue, but solutions will emerge only once research organisations, funders, publishers and government coordinate their efforts to identify practical actions that can be implemented consistently across the research community.

Meanwhile, the complexity of the problem should in no way stop us from implementing changes within our own institutions. At Glasgow, we focus on fostering a positive research culture . To do so, we develop policies, guidance, communications, training and related initiatives that support the success of researchers at all stages of their career.

With the support of our senior management, we have introduced several initiatives that we hope will make our institution an inspiring place in which to develop a career — whether it is academic or administrative, operational or technical, or indeed something different altogether. Some of these initiatives are summarised in this post ; in this article we will also share the lessons we learned along the way that might be useful to others.

Start from what you know

Research culture is a hazy concept, which includes the way we evaluate, support and reward quality in research, how we recognise varied contributions to a research activity, and the way we support different career paths.

Of all the things you could do to improve research culture, start from the priorities that you think matter most to your organisation; those that reflect its values, fit with what your community really cares about, or align to the activities that are already in progress. If you can, line up your agenda to an external driver. In our situation, two prominent drivers are the UK Research Excellence Framework (an exercise that assesses the quality of research, including the research environment, at all UK universities), and the Athena Swan awards (which evaluate gender equality at institutional and local levels). Our research culture initiatives also work alongside everyday drivers from research funders and other bodies, such as concordats on research integrity , career development and open research data .

Even better, align your initiative to more than one agenda. For example, we are supporting transparency, fairness, accountability (and therefore quality, career development, and collaboration) by requesting that research articles deposited in our institutional repository follow the CRediT taxonomy , whereby the roles and responsibilities of each authors are laid down explicitly.

Once you know what you mean by culture, write it down and let people know. This will aid communication, keep everyone focussed, and avoid the misunderstanding that culture is a solution to all our problems (“The car parking is a nightmare. I thought we had a culture agenda!”).

At Glasgow we define a positive research culture as one in which colleagues (i) are valued for their contributions to a research activity, (ii) support each other to succeed, and (iii) are supported to produce research that meets the highest standards of academic rigour. We have then aligned our activities to meet these aims, for example by redesigning our promotion criteria to include collegiality, and creating a new career track for research scientists (see Box 1 ).

Changing promotion criteria and career trajectories to foster a different research culture

At the University of Glasgow, academic promotion criteria are based on a 'preponderance approach': candidates need only meet the necessary criteria in four of the seven dimensions used to assess staff for promotion (academic outputs; grant capture; supervision; esteem; learning and teaching practice; impact; leadership, management and engagement). For the 2019–2020 promotions round, the University has also introduced a requirement to evidence collegiality as well as excellence in each of the four qualifying dimensions. The criteria recognise not only the achievement of the individual but also how that individual has supported the careers of others.

From 2019–2020 onwards, promotion criteria for the academic track also explicitly state that one of the four qualifying criteria should be either academic outputs or impact. By ‘impact’ we mean the evidenced benefits to society that have resulted from the research – these could be economic, societal, cultural, or related to health and policy. The new criteria therefore formally acknowledge that societal impact holds as much value to the institution as outputs, and that generating and evidencing impact takes time. It also ensures that staff does not feel under pressure to ‘do everything’. We will be monitoring the effect of these changes in mid 2020.

In addition, Glasgow has recently introduced a career pathway for research scientists: this track recognises and rewards the contributions made by researchers who have specialist knowledge and skills, such as bioinformaticians. The contributions and intellectual leadership provided by these roles are often not reflected in the traditional promotion criteria, which depend on lead or senior authorships. Research scientists can instead progress in their careers by demonstrating specialist work stream, as well as team contributions.

Practice, not policy

Success will not come from issuing policies, but by making practical changes that signal “the way we do things around here”. Even if university policies are read, they will be forgotten unless the principles are embedded in standard practice. And if we are not serious about our practices, then we are not credible about our intentions.

Over 1500 organisations have signed DORA and have committed not to use unreliable proxies such as journal impact factors in research evaluation. Yet, even purging references to journal impact factors from all paperwork is no guarantee that these or other metrics will not be used. If we are serious about fair evaluation mechanisms, then we need to provide evaluation panels with meaningful information. At Glasgow, we ask applicants to describe in 100 words the importance of their output, and their contribution to it. Many organisations have switched to the use of narrative formats, for instance the Royal Society , or the Dutch research council ( NWO ). To show that we value all dimensions of research, we also ask for a commitment to open research and give parity of credit to academic outputs (such as papers) and the societal impact they create (see Box 1 ).

To ensure that changes are felt on the ground, we are embedding these priorities in annual appraisals, promotion and recruitment, so that the same expectations are encountered in every relevant setting. We have also included the importance of responsible metrics in recruitment training, and will be working with our colleagues in human resources to ensure that local conversations with hiring managers are consistent with our metrics policy (see Box 2 ).

Responsible metrics

The policy on the responsible use of metrics means ensuring that the mechanisms we use to evaluate research quality are appropriate and fairly applied. For example, we need to make sure that quantitative indicators are suitably benchmarked and normalised by subject, and that they are used along qualitative ones. This is to avoid the over-reliance on single-point metrics (such as research funding) and over-use of unreliable proxies for quality (such as journal impact factors).

The policy describes our approach to evaluating the quality of our outputs, our supervision and our grant capture. The proof, however, is in the way the policy is implemented in practice. For example, applicants to our strategic recruitment schemes are requested to select their four best outputs, describe the significance of each output to the field (without relying on impact factors), and narrate their contribution to the work. Applicants are also asked to describe their commitment to open research. This approach allows the recruitment panel to obtain a more rounded impression of the candidate and, we hope, reduces the use of unhelpful proxies such as length of publication list or journal impact factors.

Start, even if you cannot see the finish line

Once you have decided on the general direction, start by doing something without worrying about scoping the project from start to finish.

At Glasgow we started by doing a 360-degree review of our provision for research integrity: this was not just about the training but also about raising the visibility of this agenda in the community. We did not call it ‘culture’ then, but we realised that progress would come from communicating the dimensions of good practice (e.g. open research) rather than by sanctioning breaches of conduct. That exercise gave us experience of getting support from senior management, managing a cross-institutional working group, and getting buy-in from the academic body through the establishment of a network of 29 integrity advisers . These individuals champion this agenda to researchers, contribute to training and policy and also participate in research misconduct panels.

From integrity, we moved to open research, and from there, to careers. It started with compliance, and progressed towards culture. Do not wait for the rules to come to you. Make your own. Have confidence that once projects are initiated, they will suggest future courses of action.

Shout about it

If you want to be noticed, it helps to over-communicate. If your project serves more than one agenda, then your colleagues in, say, human resources, the library, the research office, and the equality, diversity, and inclusion team will already be helping you to amplify the message. We have set up a Culture and Careers group that brings together a range of relevant professional groups and colleagues. Focusing on our culture activities and the training that we can provide to staff and students helps us to share knowledge and to highlight where different agendas can reinforce each other.

Make the framework easy to understand: at Glasgow we talk about supporting what we value (e.g. CRediT), recognising what we value (e.g. our promotion criteria), and celebrating those values, for instance with our recently launched research culture awards . These highlight outstanding activities that promote collegial behaviours and contribute to a positive research culture. In 2019, over 30 applications were received from across the institution, reflecting a variety of career stages, coming from academic, technical and professional services roles, and ranging from groups of researchers to individual staff. The awards have changed the conversation as to what culture actually is.

But equally do not fret if colleagues do not know how your various activities fit together under a ‘culture’ agenda. It is far more important that researchers embrace the activities themselves (see “Practice, not policy” above).

Communication takes legwork, so use any channel you have. Present at committees, consult with different disciplines and career stages. Speak to the willing. Welcome the challenge. Bring together different voices in a discussion forum. For example, we recently organised a research culture event involving action-oriented conversations with academics, administrators, funders, societies, and publishers; this helped to build our evidence base, share perspectives and move forward institutional thinking in relation to key areas of culture (see the illustration for a summary of the discussion).

Map of the ideas discussed at the Re-imagining research culture workshop organised at the University of Glasgow in September 2019.

Jacquie Forbes at drawntolearn.co.uk (CC BY 4.0)

A research culture survey allowed us to assess how we were doing. It gathered examples of good practice (for example, that the community appreciated reading groups and the opportunity for internal peer review) and it highlighted the aspects of research our staff were comfortable with (open access, for instance). It also pointed us towards what people wanted to know more about, such as how to increase the visibility of their research. Together, the event and survey have informed our next actions (you can access the question set here ) and our action plan for the next five years.

No such thing as a single culture

If you work in a research organisation, you are probably relaxed about the fact that different parts of the institution have their own priorities, as befits the disciplinary community.

Institution-wide projects should be designed to address the broad ambitions of the university: for example, all areas of the university can participate in the research culture awards or meet the requirement for collegiality in our promotion criteria.

Each discipline can then be invited to implement the culture programme that suits them. Getting this right requires a bit of flexibility, some confidence that things will not unravel, but also clear leadership. Some institutional glue can be provided by sharing case studies between areas, which is helped by collecting feedback on how policies and guidance are being implemented at the university level. For example, our new guidance on embedding equality, diversity and inclusion in conferences and events contains a weblink to a feedback survey. We hope that this will help us to pinpoint where colleagues are struggling to implement best practice, perhaps due to other organisational challenges such as funding, lack of clear guidance or procurement.

What’s next?

We have published an action plan for our 2020 – 2025 university strategy , which covers career development, research evaluation, collegiality, open research and research integrity. The starting point will be to focus on supporting career development, on helping researchers to enhance their visibility, and on developing an informed and committed leadership across the university.

We have also published an institutional statement to highlight the road travelled and our future plans. All the while, we are drawing inspiration from others: the Wellcome Trust and the Royal Society, and the progressive policies introduced by publishers such as PLoS, eLife, Wiley, and F1000. We are excited by the launch of initiatives that will inform better decision-making in the culture space, and online groups for sharing ideas. We want to be a part of organisations, such as the UK Reproducibility Network , that identify priorities and work together in implementing them.

We are also casting our eyes towards broader aspects of culture: how do we define and encourage research creativity, how do we make more time, and how might we extend the scope of our actions beyond research staff to all those that contribute to research?

Culture does not happen at the expense of excellence; an updated culture is what will allow even more of us to excel.

Author details

Tanita Casci (@tanitacasci) is the Head of Research Policy at the University of Glasgow, Glasgow, United Kingdom

For correspondence

Competing interests.

Elizabeth Adams (@researchdreams) is the Researcher Development Manager at the University of Glasgow, Glasgow, United Kingdom

Acknowledgements

We are grateful to the extended network of academics, technicians, students and professional services staff who over a long time have variously driven, supported, and constructively challenged what we are doing.

Publication history

• Received: January 29, 2020
• Accepted: January 29, 2020
• Version of Record published : February 10, 2020

© 2020, Casci and Adams

This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License , which permits unrestricted use and redistribution provided that the original author and source are credited.

Views, downloads and citations are aggregated across all versions of this paper published by eLife.

Download links

Downloads (link to download the article as pdf).

• Article PDF

Open citations (links to open the citations from this article in various online reference manager services)

Cite this article (links to download the citations from this article in formats compatible with various reference manager tools), categories and tags.

• research culture
• academic careers
• academic promotion
• responsible metrics
• University of Glasgow
• Part of Collection

Research Culture: A Selection of Articles

Further reading.

Research culture needs to be improved for the benefit of science and scientists.

Be the first to read new articles from eLife

The Value of Research Culture

• Royal University of Bhutan

• University of Minnesota Twin Cities

Discover the world's research

• 25+ million members
• 160+ million publication pages
• 2.3+ billion citations
• Dennis John Rabson Matekenya

• Novi Sylvia

• Evi Sopandi

• Jet G. Guerrero

• Leonora L. Sauquillo

• Françoise Pommaret
• J High Educ Pol Manag
• Michael Pratt
• Dimitri Margaritis
• Int J Acad Dev

• Recruit researchers
• Join for free
• Login Email Tip: Most researchers use their institutional email address as their ResearchGate login Password Forgot password? Keep me logged in Log in or Continue with Google Welcome back! Please log in. Email · Hint Tip: Most researchers use their institutional email address as their ResearchGate login Password Forgot password? Keep me logged in Log in or Continue with Google No account? Sign up

Culture: 4 keys to why it matters

Delivers large-scale performance-improvement programs that foster culture change and counsels senior executives making leadership transitions

March 27, 2018 What separates the highest performing organizations from the rest? Clever strategy? Superior products? Better people?

Perhaps they do – for a while – but any advantage fades if it is not built atop something more fundamental. Something that enables a competitive advantage to sustain and grow over time. That something is culture .

What is culture?

Culture starts with what people do and how they do it. In any industry, what people do may not differ dramatically, but high-performing organizations distinguish themselves in how they do it. This cumulative effect of what is done and how it is done ultimately determines an organization’s performance.

Culture also encompasses why people do what they do. As the Titanic’s captain grasped a little too late on that fateful night in 1912, 90 percent of an iceberg’s mass lies beneath the surface. Culture is similar as it includes observable behaviors (the what and how above the surface) as well as everything underneath – the shared mindsets and beliefs that influence how people in an organization behave. Just like a captain navigating frigid waters, anyone trying to understand an organization’s culture must recognize that most of what matters cannot be readily seen.

Thus, culture is the common set of behaviors and underlying mindsets and beliefs that shape how people work and interact day to day.

Four reasons why culture matters

• Culture correlates with performance. Based on our research of over 1,000 organizations that encompass more than three million individuals, those with top quartile cultures (as measured by our Organizational Health Index ) post a return to shareholders 60 percent higher than median companies and 200 percent higher than those in the bottom quartile.
• Culture is inherently difficult to copy. The quickening pace of innovation means that products and business models face the constant threat of being replicated. In this environment, the ultimate competitive advantage is a healthy culture that adapts automatically to changing conditions to find new ways to succeed.
• Healthy cultures enable organizations to adapt. In a world where the one constant is change, culture becomes even more important because organizations with high-performing cultures thrive on change. The converse also holds true: Unhealthy cultures do not respond well to change. Our research shows that 70 percent of transformations fail, and 70 percent of those failures are due to culture-related issues.
• Unhealthy cultures lead to underperformance…or worse. Over time, not only do unhealthy cultures foster lackluster performance, but they can be your undoing. Daily headlines attest, culture can bring corporate giants to their knees.

This topic – how to create healthier and higher-performing cultures – is one we will explore in more detail in subsequent posts.

Learn more about our People & Organizational Performance Practice

• Open access
• Published: 31 August 2024

An examination of the relationship between risk perceptions, cultural-religious beliefs and coping during COVID-19 pandemic control in South Asian countries: a systematic review

• Rakhshi Memon 1 ,
• Ayesha Khaliq 2 ,
• Veronica Ranieri 1 ,
• Muqaddas Asif 2 ,
• Mujeeb Masood Bhatti 3 ,
• Bilal Ahmad Khan 2 ,
• Nasim Chaudhry 2 , 7 ,
• Imran B. Chauhdry 2 , 4 , 5 , 7 ,
• Nusrat Husain 5 , 6 &
• Sarah J. L. Edwards 1  

BMC Psychology volume  12 , Article number:  461 ( 2024 ) Cite this article

Metrics details

Covid 19 was declared as a public health emergency by the World Health Organisation (WHO) due to its rapid spread and catastrophic effects on health. It affected around 119 M people with mortality rate of 0.27% worldwide, including South-Asians. This review aims to understand the risk perceptions, cultural religious beliefs and the coping mechanisms of South Asians during the Covid 19 pandemic.

We conducted a systematic review following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. The following search engines were used: Medline, Cochrane Library, PsycINFO, CINAHL, and Web of Science. Included studies investigated perceptions and opinions of individuals on knowledge, risk and protective factors, native faith based practices, and attitudes towards the COVID-19 pandemic.

The database search produced 282 articles to screen. The final narrative synthesis included five studies comprising of 13,476 participants from Pakistan, India, Nepal, and Bangladesh. Ten studies, comprising 7,893 participants, were eligible and included for meta-analysis. The overall pooled prevalence with maximum heterogeneity for correct knowledge of symptoms, hand washing or use of sanitizers, face masking use of herbal or traditional remedies and physical distancing or avoidance of contact was reported through meta-analysis.

The review brings forth a useful comparison of individual and cultural differences in KAP, risk perceptions and coping strategies. This review highlights the need for and importance of tailored information dissemination, culturally sensitive risk communication, targeted educational interventions, community engagement and empowerment, policy, and infrastructure improvements, as well as continued research and data collection. By addressing these implications, efforts to mitigate the impact of COVID-19 can be more effective and equitable across diverse populations.

Prospero registration

CRD42021246475.

Peer Review reports

Introduction

A novel coronavirus SARS-Cov-2 was first identified as a causal pathogen of COVID-19 disease in humans in December 2019 in Wuhan, China [ 1 ]. COVID-19 spread rapidly around the globe and was declared a pandemic by the World Health Organisation (WHO) on March 11, 2020. Since it was first identified, SARS-CoV-2 has infected more than 119 M individuals around the globe (WHO, 2020) with a mortality rate of 0.27% [ 2 ]. South Asian countries account for 10% of COVID-19 cases around the globe [ 2 ] with a Case Fatality Rate (CFR) of 3.5% which is far less than that of economically developed countries (8.0%) [ 3 , 4 ] owing to the differences in the structure of age group [ 5 ]. Statistical trends indicate that, among South Asian countries, India has the highest number of reported COVID-19 cases and deaths whilst Bhutan has the lowest [ 6 ].

Containment of COVID-19 is heavily dependent on the precautionary measures taken by the masses [ 7 ] which are, in turn, dependent on risk perception [ 8 ] and health beliefs [ 9 ]. Risk perception is a subjective judgement or belief of an individual regarding the severity of potential harm and an important driving factor of protective behavior [ 10 , 11 ]. In addition to risk perception, health beliefs also play an important role in determining attitudes and behaviour towards the pandemic [ 12 ]. As per the Health Belief model, perceived benefits, perceived susceptibility, perceived severity, perceived barriers, and cue-to‐action influence such attitudes and behaviour [ 13 ].

In addition to risk perception and health beliefs, the ‘Knowledge, Attitude, and Practice’ (KAP) framework has also been used to identify how knowledge about diseases can affect attitude, practice, and disease burden associated with it [ 14 , 15 , 16 ]. In the context of COVID-19, KAP refers to understanding people’s correct knowledge about the virus, their attitudes towards it, and their native faith based practices they adopt to prevent its spread. Knowledge about COVID-19 is relatively high among the general population and they hold a positive attitude towards protective measures such as wearing a mask, washing hands, and using hand sanitizer etc. [ 17 , 18 , 19 ]. However, the most common source of knowledge about COVID-19 is social media [ 20 , 21 ]. The KAP has been noted as above average among individuals with higher education, females, and healthcare professionals [ 22 ]. Similarly, females are more inclined towards taking precautionary measures than males [ 19 , 20 ].

High-risk perception and perceived severity of COVID-19 can have a direct impact on the mental health of the individual [ 23 , 24 , 25 ]. Commonly experienced mental disorders during the COVID-19 pandemic in South Asian countries include nonpsychotic depression, anxiety, insomnia, alcohol-related disorder, and somatic concerns [ 23 , 25 ]. however, due to the strict adherence of most South Asian countries to religion, most inhabitants of these countries tend to turn towards religion and use religious coping mechanisms to deal with major life stressors [ 26 ]. Religiously framed behavioral, emotional, or cognitive responses to stressors are known as religious coping [ 27 ]. In other words, religious coping refers to help-seeking from religion – holy scriptures and therapy from religious leaders – in a stressful situation to reduce distressing thoughts and emotions [ 28 ]. Religious coping during COVID-19 has shown evidence to lower depressive symptoms [ 29 ] and stress [ 30 ], lesser loneliness [ 31 ] improve positive affect and life satisfaction [ 32 ]. Though literature examining risk perceptions, cultural-religious beliefs and coping during the covid-19 pandemic from many countries is available, a combined glance especially through the lens of a multicultural and multi-religious group like South Asia remains understudied to date. For example, a review of pandemic perceptions [ 33 ] found that different religious traditions hold differing beliefs (it’s a religious curse or only religion can save us) regarding infectious diseases. Therefore, the current systematic review aims to find out the KAP of South Asians toward COVID-19 and their coping mechanism for dealing with COVID-19, Which focuses on.

Knowledge: This refers to what South Asians know about COVID-19. It could include their correct understanding of the virus, its transmission, symptoms, preventive measures, available treatments, and vaccination.

Attitudes: This encompasses the beliefs, opinions, and perceptions that South Asians hold about COVID-19. It could include their level of concern, fear, trust in authorities or healthcare systems, perception of risk, and attitudes towards preventive measures such as mask-wearing, social distancing, and vaccination.

Practices: This refers to the actions and behaviors that South Asians adopt in response to COVID-19. It could include their adherence to preventive measures, such as wearing masks, practicing hand hygiene, maintaining social distance, avoiding large gatherings, and seeking healthcare when necessary.

Moreover, the systematic review aims to explore the native faith based practices employed by South Asians to deal with the challenges posed by COVID-19. Coping mechanisms are the strategies individuals use to manage stress, anxiety, and other negative emotions associated with the pandemic. These mechanisms could include seeking social support, engaging in positive activities, practicing mindfulness or relaxation techniques, maintaining routines, and accessing mental health services.

Protocol registration

A systematic review protocol was developed and registered online with PROSPERO (CRD42021246475). This review followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) reporting guidelines [ 34 ].

Databases and search strategy

The following electronic databases (Inception to 1st November 2020): Medline, Cochrane Library, PsycINFO, CINAHL, and Web of Science, were searched using four concepts including knowledge and practices, culture, COVID-19, and South Asia. The overall search strings were: (Perception OR Knowledge OR Information OR Attitude* OR Awareness OR Practices OR Opinions OR Beliefs) AND (Religiou*) AND (COVID-19 OR COVID OR Coronavirus OR SARS-CoV-2) AND (Pakistan OR India OR Bangladesh OR Sri Lanka OR Nepal OR Bhutan OR Maldives OR Afghanistan OR South Asia*) ( See Table  1 ). A search update was run from 2nd November 2020 to 28th Feb 2024 in get all other potential eligible articles.

Eligibility criteria and selection of studies

This review looked for studies with any quantitative data including but not limited to cross-sectional, cohort studies, case-control studies, interrupted time series or mixed methods research. No restrictions were placed on participants’ characteristics about age, morbidity, or socio-economic status. Included studies investigating perceptions and opinions of individuals on knowledge, risk and protective factors, practices, cultural traditions, and attitudes towards the COVID-19 pandemic. Studies reporting findings only from South Asian countries in the English language were considered for inclusion. Title/ abstract and full-text screening were performed by two reviewers independently (AK, VR). Any discrepancies were resolved through discussion with third reviewer arbitration (RM).

The following PECO* framework explains the eligibility criteria more precisely.

• PECO* (P = Population, E = Exposure, C = Comparison and O = Outcome)

Data extraction

Extracted data included study details (author, date, study location), study design information (type of design, recruitment method), participant characteristics (target sample, age, gender), measures used, and results of analyses. Studies reporting knowledge or practices in mean or median were not included in quantitative synthesis. Two independent reviewers (AK, MA) carried out the data extraction for each study, and then compared, with discrepancies resolved through discussion.

Risk of bias assessment

The quality of the included studies was evaluated using a Risk of Bias (ROB) assessment of Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) for prevalence data studies tool. This tool assesses ROB over nine domains, including participant recruitment, sample size and calculation, study subjects, measurement tools and appropriateness of analysis methods (see Table  2 ). Ratings were made independently by two reviewers (MA, VR) and any conflicts were resolved through third reviewer arbitration (AK). Funnel plots along with egger test value was reported for potential publication bias. Updated searches were screened and extracted by two independent researchers (BA, AK).

Data synthesis

Narrative synthesis and meta-analysis were utilized for data synthesis. We decided to perform a meta-analysis if at least 3 studies were provided with homogenous characteristics allowing meaningful interpretation of pooled estimates. We set this minimum criterion because our review was based in South Asia, and we wanted to make use of available data. A recent review of the meta-analysis indicated that meta-analysis with three studies is common in medical literature. Studies reporting percentages or observed events were included in the meta-analysis. Overall polled prevalence/ proportions with a 95% confidence interval of knowledge, attitude and practices were generated using double arcsine transformation (Freeman-Tukey transformation) with random effects. To investigate any potential heterogeneity, I 2 statistics were utilised. Studies reporting overall mean, or medians were not included in the meta-analysis and were summarised in the narrative synthesis [ 35 , 36 , 37 , 38 , 39 , 40 , 41 , 42 , 43 ]. In addition, the study participants, outcomes, settings, and findings were also summarised in the narrative synthesis. The study’s characteristics are presented in Table  3 .

Study characteristics

A total of 282 articles were retrieved from Medline, Cochrane Library, PsychINFO, CINAHL, and Web of Science since inception till 28th Feb, 2024. After duplication removal, 248 articles were included from title and abstract screening, out of which only 18 met the criteria at full length screening. Reference lists of all included articles were also searched for any additional eligible article to be included. 3 articles couldn’t be found in full length as a result a total of 15 articles were included in this review ( See Fig.  1 ).

PRISMA flow chart

The review provided a narrative synthesis and meta-analysis of the included studies, which is in line with PRISMA guidelines for reporting systematic reviews. The paper screened 282 articles and included 10 studies for meta-analysis with a total of 7,893 participants from South Asian countries, demonstrating a systematic approach. Meta-synthesis was conducted on five studies with 13,476 participants, indicating a qualitative synthesis as recommended by PRISMA.

Meta-analysis

Most questionnaires and reported statistics in the studies were heterogenous therefore only ( N  = 10) a few studies were included in the quantitative synthesis of frequency rates and total sample size. However, in all included studies separate rates were given for each item targeting any specific knowledge area or practice hence the overall prevalence of knowledge or practice was either meaningless or not reported.

A total of ten studies reported the prevalence of three or more than three of the following: (i) correct knowledge about symptoms (7 studies), (ii) hand washing or use of sanitizer (9 studies), (iii) use of the face mask (9 studies), (iv) herbal and traditional remedies (3 studies) and (v) physical distancing (10 studies). By combining all ten studies, our meta-analysis is based on a total of 7877 participants. Separate pooled prevalence rates were estimated for knowledge of symptoms, handwashing or sanitizing practices, use of masks, any herbal remedies and physical distancing.

The pooled prevalence for correct knowledge of symptoms and various practices was generally high with a ceiling effect (except for herbal and traditional remedies) along with high heterogeneity. The overall pooled prevalence for (1) correct knowledge of symptoms = 0.86 (95% CI: LLCI = 0.76; ULCI = 0.94) with high heterogeneity (I 2  = 98.75%) ( See Figs.  2 ), (2) hand washing or use of sanitizers = 0.89 (95% CI: LLCI = 0.79; ULCI = 0.97) with maximum heterogeneity (I 2  = 99.34%) ( See Figs.  3 ), (3) Face Masking = 0.85 (95% CI: LLCI = 0.75; ULCI = 0.92) with maximum heterogeneity (I 2  = 99.10%) ( See Figs.  4 ), (4) use of herbal or traditional remedies = 0.20 (95% CI: LLCI = 0.07; ULCI = 0.37) and high heterogeneity (I 2  = 98.90%) ( See Figs.  5 ) and (5) physical distancing or avoidance of contact = 0.80 (95% CI: LLCI = 0.65 ULCI = 0.92) and high heterogeneity (I 2  = 99.56%) ( See Fig.  6 ).

Pooled prevalence of correct knowledge about symptoms

Pooled prevalence of hand washing or use of sanitizers

Pooled prevalence of use of face mask

Pooled prevalence of herbal and traditional remedies

Pooled prevalence of practicing physical distancing or avoiding contact

All pooled prevalence estimates were associated with very high heterogeneity. Given the limited number of studies, subgroup analysis wasn’t appropriate. However, one of the potential reasons for high heterogeneity was the high sample sizes in studies with lower standard error, increasing the power of test statistics to detect heterogeneity.

Additionally, the funnel plot indicated a potential risk of bias by demonstrating a diagonal spread of studies either clustered in the lower right or upper left of the plot indicating asymmetry and a potential risk of publication bias ( see Fig.  7 ). We also conducted sensitivity analysis by removing studies at high risk of bias, however no major effect on estimates was observed.

Funnel plot for reporting publication bias

Narrative synthesis

The narrative synthesis included five studies comprising of 13,476 participants from Pakistan, India, Nepal, and Bangladesh. In general, participants exhibited adequate knowledge of COVID-19, positive attitudes toward combating the pandemic and adopted preventative measures, such as social distancing, to avoid the spread of the virus. Notably, participants mentioned the role of religion and culture in coping with the pandemic in seven out of eleven studies. Participants in several studies reported that religious behaviour such as prayer helped them cope with COVID-19 fear [ 35 , 36 , 37 ]. Moreover, Haque et al. (2021) reported that people would like religious leaders to help them cope with covid-19 [ 38 ]. In addition, several studies reported the use of traditional methods to treat COVID-19 symptoms [ 16 , 37 , 38 ].

People’s KAP towards COVID-19 and their coping strategies

Most studies showed that people were aware of the symptoms and effects of COVID-19, as well as their route of transmission [ 16 , 38 , 39 , 40 ]. An average of over 70% of the participants were aware of the correct definition of COVID-19 [ 16 , 35 , 36 , 37 , 38 , 39 , 40 , 41 , 42 , 43 ], apart from the Mamun et al. (2021) where the average correct knowledge score was 57.4% [ 43 ]. The respondents knew that COVID-19 is a deadly disease but with early and proper treatment, recovery is possible. Haq et al. (2020) found that the urban population was more knowledgeable than the rural residents [ 16 ], whereas Noreen’s (2020) study, reported that females had greater knowledge of COVID-19 compared to males.

The overall attitude towards COVID-19 was optimistic and positive. Participants believed that the disease is combatable, and it would be controlled eventually [ 40 , 41 , 42 ]. In terms of preventing the spread of the virus, a trend towards favouring strict measures was seen [ 37 , 38 , 39 ] Although, attitudes towards the pandemic were generally positive, participants also reported a few negative reactions i.e., not taking COVID-19 as a serious problem. Most participants experienced fear at some point during the pandemic [ 16 , 35 , 36 , 38 , 43 ]. In one study, 63% reported mistrust towards the government in controlling the disease [ 38 ]. The virus brought with it great concern for the public as they were at high risk of being infected [ 38 ]. Strict measures were taken by the government, for example, travelers had to quarantine, and educational institutes switched to online teaching. The use of print and digital media was reported to spread awareness and news about the virus. The majority had a positive attitude, but some studies showed that females were more hopeful that the spread of COVID-19 can be controlled [ 41 , 42 ].

Coping with Covid-19

Different ways and coping strategies were adopted by people to prevent themselves from getting infected by the virus. Maheshwari et al. (2020) found, isolation and treatment were efficient ways to stop the virus from spreading, and that people should isolate for at least two weeks after coming into contact with an infected person [ 39 ]. Most of the studies highlighted that people took greater precautions and hygienic practices such as hand sanitizing/hand washing, face covering and social distancing [ 16 , 39 , 40 , 42 ]. Notably, participants mentioned the role of religion and culture in coping with the pandemic in seven out of eleven studies. It was believed that praying and religious activities are most effective in critical, unpleasant circumstances [ 36 , 41 ]. On the other hand, some believed that there is no specific cure for COVID-19, yet they still turned to medications for recovery [ 37 ].

All studies with the exception of three provided comprehensive details on participants’ recruitment, sample size, study settings, measurements tools, and data analysis and response rate. Three studies (Khan et al., 2020; Bhawaneshwari et al. 2020; Basu et al.2020) lacked details pertaining to recruitment of participants, study settings, psychometric properties of measurement tools and justification for data analysis and were subsequently removed from synthesis (See Table  2 ).

The findings of this systematic review and meta-analysis highlighted a high level of heterogeneity in the true knowledge of COVID-19 among included studies. Despite the observed heterogeneity, the findings demonstrated that most of the participants (over 70% in most cases) from included studies possessed correct knowledge of COVID-19. This finding is supported by a recent meta-analysis in China [ 44 ] and a cross-sectional survey from Ethiopia [ 45 ] that reported over 70% of participants possess adequate knowledgeable about coronavirus. However, it is important to acknowledge the presence of outliers, such as a study [ 43 ] reporting a minimum average knowledge level of 57.4%. Similarly, to previous studies, our review also highlighted that participants in urban settings were more knowledgeable about COVID-19 than those living in rural settings [ 46 , 47 , 48 , 49 ]. This disparity might be due to various factors including poorer access to electricity, mobile networks and digital literacy in rural settings [ 50 , 51 ]. The limited access to internet connections, digital media platforms and linguistic barriers could be among the factors creating knowledge gap, limiting awareness efforts and impeding the dissemination of information about COVID-19 prevention and treatment in rural areas of South Asia.

Although, information is becoming more accessible online [ 50 ], it is not easily accessible in some rural areas, in part due to different education levels and the non-availability of dialect in the local language [ 51 ]. The lack of access to the internet, television, or other digital media platforms in rural South Asia can contribute to lower knowledge levels about COVID-19. This knowledge gap may result in limited understanding of preventive measures, symptoms, and treatment options for the disease. Consequently, the overall findings of the study may not accurately represent the knowledge levels of the entire population.

The review also revealed significant gender differences in COVID-19 knowledge, with females having greater knowledge of COVID-19. Similarly, Sultana et al. (2022) reported significant gender differences regarding knowledge of COVID-19 where females had more knowledge. Social media use in females [ 52 ] as a significant link between sources of information and knowledge has been highlighted by various studies [ 17 , 53 , 54 ]. Social media platforms became crucial sources of information during the pandemic therefore; this increased exposure may lead to greater engagement with COVID-19 related content leading to increased knowledge levels. Further, in most cultures, women generally have the role of looking after the family and the household. Since women often play a central role in healthcare decisions for their family, this may serve as a motivation to stay informed and seek out reliable information. More time at home may also provide more opportunities for social media use which as a result may raise awareness and better knowledge [ 55 ]. In contrast to this, male participants from a study [ 56 ] conducted in Lebanon scored high on some questions about knowledge of COVID-19 including questions related to the cause and symptoms as compared to females. This can be explained in light of previous research from various countries consistently reporting an advantage of males over females in general knowledge as well as biologically differentiated interests [ 57 ].

Although the review unveiled a positive attitude of participants towards measures to reduce the spread of SARS-CoV-2, there were also some instances of negative attitude. Participants reported fear [ 16 , 35 , 36 , 38 , 58 ], and a high risk of being infected [ 38 ]. In a previous study [ 59 ], participants across different cohorts among Asian countries were found to be more fearful. This is important as such fear has been linked to mental health difficulties such as depression, anxiety, and stress [ 1 ]. The review also reported mistrust towards the government in controlling the disease [38] however the role of important predictive factors such as the adoption of health behaviours, prosocial behaviours [ 59 ], education, and media freedom [ 60 ] has not been explored [ 60 ].

Regarding coping strategies, along with preventive measures against COVID-19 [ 16 , 39 , 40 , 42 ] participants also highlighted the role of religious coping such as praying and religious activities to combat COVID-19 [ 36 , 41 ]. Similarly, Bentzen’s study [ 61 ] which used daily searched data records of Google from 95 countries and demonstrated increased Google searches for prayer to the highest ever recorded level during the COVID-19 crisis. Additionally, the study established that more than half of the world population had prayed to end the coronavirus. Many people have strong religious beliefs, providing them an anchor and consequently helping people cope. Religious coping might act as a potential tool for managing stress during illnesses and challenging situations like the COVID-19 pandemic, as well as improving physical and mental health outcomes [ 62 , 63 , 64 ].

The review has several strengths and highlighted differences in KAP among genders as well as differences in information distribution in rural setting and urban settings and different cultures. The review enhanced our understanding of the socio-cultural influences on pandemic responses. The positive attitudes towards measures and use of religious coping strategies across studies indicated that SAs possess a strong societal willingness to engage in preventive measures. These findings could be useful to tailor public health interventions for individuals in diverse settings. However, it is important to acknowledge the limitations of the review such as heterogeneity and potential biases among included studies, which may affect the generalizability of findings. Future research should address these limitations and further explore the socio-cultural determinants of COVID-19 knowledge and behaviour. Addressing these gaps could enhance the effectiveness and cultural sensitivity of preventive interventions.

The insights gained from this review offer valuable guidance for future pandemic preparedness and response efforts. The review emphasizes the complex socio-cultural factors that influence responses to the pandemic, including risk perceptions and coping strategies. Policymakers, healthcare professionals along with other potential stakeholders such as community representatives and gatekeepers can create more effective and targeted interventions to improve community resilience and promote public health and well-being by customizing interventions to address differences in individual and cultural KAP related to the future pandemics.

Data availability

The data and materials used in this systematic review are available upon request by email to the corresponding author [email protected].

Eng JH, Liu YX, Yuan J, Wang FX, Wu WB, Li JX, et al. First case of COVID-19 complicated with fulminant myocarditis: a case report and insights. Infection. 2020;48:773–7.

Article   Google Scholar  

Platform/C/chevron/down copy [Internet]. [cited 2023 May 15]. https://covid19.who.int/table

Dongarwar D, Salihu HM. COVID-19 pandemic: marked global disparities in fatalities according to geographic location and universal health care. Int J MCH AIDS [Internet]. 2020;9(2):213–6. https://doi.org/10.21106/ijma.389

Abou Ghayda R, Lee KH, Han YJ, Ryu S, Hong SH, Yoon S et al. The global case fatality rate of coronavirus disease 2019 by continents and national income: a meta-analysis. J Med Virol [Internet]. 2022;94(6):2402–13. https://doi.org/10.1002/jmv.27610

Zaveri A, Chouhan P. Are child and youth population at lower risk of COVID-19 fatalities? Evidences from South-East Asian and European countries. Child Youth Serv Rev [Internet]. 2020;119(105360):105360. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2020.105360

Malik YS, Obli Rajendran V, Ma I, Pande T, Ravichandran K, Jaganathasamy N et al. Responses to COVID-19 in South Asian association for regional cooperation (SAARC) countries in 2020, a data analysis during a world of crises. Chaos Solitons Fractals [Internet]. 2021;152(111311):111311. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chaos.2021.111311

Paul A, Chatterjee S, Bairagi N. Prediction on Covid-19 epidemic for different countries: Focusing on South Asia under various precautionary measures [Internet]. bioRxiv. medRxiv; 2020. https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.04.08.20055095

Kwok KO, Li KK, Chan HHH, Yi YY, Tang A, Wei WI et al. Community responses during early phase of COVID-19 epidemic, Hong Kong. Emerg Infect Dis [Internet]. 2020;26(7):1575–9. https://doi.org/10.3201/eid2607.200500

Tong KK, Chen JH, Yu EW, Wu AM. Adherence to COVID-19 precautionary measures: applying the health belief model and generalised social beliefs to a probability community sample. Appl Psychology: Health Well-Being. 2020;12:1205–23.

Google Scholar  

Molina KM, Molina KM, Goltz HH, Kowalkouski MA, Hart SL, Latini D et al. Risk perception. In: Encyclopedia of Behavioral Medicine [Internet]. New York, NY: Springer New York; 2013. pp. 1689–91. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-1005-9_866

Renner B, Gamp M, Schmälzle R, Schupp HT. Health risk perception. In: International encyclopedia of the social & behavioral sciences [Internet]. Elsevier; 2015. pp. 702–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/b978-0-08-097086-8.14138-8

Coe AB, Gatewood SBS, Moczygemba LR, Goode J-VKR, Beckner JO. The use of the health belief model to assess predictors of intent to receive the novel (2009) H1N1 influenza vaccine. Inov Pharm [Internet]. 2012;3(2):1–11. https://doi.org/10.24926/iip.v3i2.257

Strecher VJ, Rosenstock IM, Baum A, Newman S, Weinman J. Cambridge handbook of psychology, health and medicine. Health behavior and health education: theory, research, and practice. San Francisco; 1997.

Mascie-Taylor CGN, Karim R, Karim E, Akhtar S, Ahmed T, Montanari RM. The cost-effectiveness of health education in improving knowledge and awareness about intestinal parasites in rural Bangladesh. Econ Hum Biol [Internet]. 2003;1(3):321–30. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ehb.2003.08.001

Goh YM, Chua S. Knowledge, attitude and practices for design for safety: a study on civil & structural engineers. Accid Anal Prev [Internet]. 2016;93:260–6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aap.2015.09.023

ul Haq N, Hassali MA, Shafie AA, Saleem F, Farooqui M, Aljadhey H. A cross sectional assessment of knowledge, attitude and practice towards Hepatitis B among healthy population of Quetta, Pakistan. BMC Public Health [Internet]. 2012;12(1):692. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2458-12-692

Zhang M, Zhou M, Tang F, Wang Y, Nie H, Zhang L et al. Knowledge, attitude, and practice regarding COVID-19 among healthcare workers in Henan, China. J Hosp Infect [Internet]. 2020;105(2):183–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhin.2020.04.012

Mahmood S, Hussain T, Mahmood F, Ahmad M, Majeed A, Beg BM et al. Attitude, perception, and knowledge of COVID-19 among general public in Pakistan. Front Public Health. 2009;8.

Ladiwala ZFR, Dhillon RA, Zahid I, Irfan O, Khan MS, Awan S et al. Knowledge, attitude and perception of Pakistanis towards COVID-19; a large cross-sectional survey. BMC Public Health [Internet]. 2021;21(1):21. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-020-10083-y

ALdowyan N, Abdallah AS, El-Gharabawy R. Knowledge, attitude and practice (KAP) study about middle East respiratory syndrome Coronavirus (MERS-CoV) among population in Saudi Arabia. Int Arch Med [Internet]. 2017;10. https://doi.org/10.3823/2524

Zhang J, Zhu L, Li S, Huang J, Ye Z, Wei Q et al. Rural-urban disparities in knowledge, behaviors, and mental health during COVID-19 pandemic: a community-based cross-sectional survey. Medicine (Baltimore) [Internet]. 2021;100(13):e25207. https://doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000025207

Peng Y, Pei C, Zheng Y, Wang J, Zhang K, Zheng Z et al. Knowledge, attitude and practice associated with COVID-19 among university students: a cross-sectional survey in China [Internet]. Research Square. Research Square; 2020. https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-21185/v1

Li J-B, Yang A, Dou K, Cheung RYM. Self-control moderates the association between perceived severity of Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and mental health problems among the Chinese public. Int J Environ Res Public Health [Internet]. 2020;17(13):4820. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17134820

Mukhtar S. Mental health and emotional impact of COVID-19: Applying Health Belief Model for medical staff to general public of Pakistan. Brain Behav Immun [Internet]. 2020;87:28–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bbi.2020.04.012

Vindegaard N, Benros ME. COVID-19 pandemic and mental health consequences: Systematic review of the current evidence. Brain Behav Immun [Internet]. 2020;89:531–42. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bbi.2020.05.048

Vance DE, Brennan M, Enah C, Smith GL, Kaur J. Religion, spirituality, and older adults with HIV: critical personal and social resources for an aging epidemic. Clin Interv Aging [Internet]. 2011;6:101–9. https://doi.org/10.2147/CIA.S16349

Wortmann J. Religious coping. InEncyclopedia of behavioral medicine. Cham: Springer International Publishing; 2020.

Abu-Raiya H, Sasson T, Pargament KI, Rosmarin DH. Religious coping and health and well-being among Jews and Muslims in Israel. Int J Psychol Relig [Internet]. 2020;30(3):202–15. https://doi.org/10.1080/10508619.2020.1727692

Thomas J, Barbato M. Positive religious coping and mental health among Christians and Muslims in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. Religions (Basel) [Internet]. 2020;11(10):498. https://doi.org/10.3390/rel11100498

Pirutinsky S, Cherniak AD, Rosmarin DH. COVID-19, mental health, and religious coping among American Orthodox Jews. J Relig Health [Internet]. 2020;59(5):2288–301. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10943-020-01070-z

Yıldırım M, Kızılgeçit M, Seçer İ, Karabulut F, Angın Y, Dağcı A et al. Meaning in life, religious coping, and loneliness during the Coronavirus health crisis in Turkey. J Relig Health [Internet]. 2021;60(4):2371–85. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10943-020-01173-7

Habib DHA, Hussain S, Habib DNA. Religious coping as a predictor of positive affect and life satisfaction during epidemic conditions of COVID-19. ojs [Internet]. 2020;3(3):42–8. https://doi.org/10.36902/sjesr-vol3-iss3-2020(42-48 ).

Ting RS-K, Aw Yong Y-Y, Tan M-M, Yap C-K. Cultural responses to Covid-19 pandemic: religions, illness perception, and perceived stress. Front Psychol [Internet]. 2021;12:634863. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.634863

Page MJ, Moher D. Evaluations of the uptake and impact of the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA) statement and extensions: a scoping review. Syst Rev [Internet]. 2017;6(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-017-0663-8

Yasin A. Intensity and manifestation of COVID-19 fear: a cross sectional analysis. Psychiatria Danubina. 2020;32(3–4):499–504.

Article   PubMed   Google Scholar  

George CE, Inbaraj LR, Rajukutty S, de Witte LP. Challenges, experience and coping of health professionals in delivering healthcare in an urban slum in India during the first 40 days of COVID-19 crisis: a mixed method study. BMJ Open [Internet]. 2020;10(11):e042171. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2020-042171

Aqeel U, Daud Ali M, Iqbal Z, Mirza MA. Knowledge, attitudes, and practices toward Coronavirus disease-19 infection among residents of Delhi ncr, India: a cross-sectional survey based study. Asian J Pharm Clin Res [Internet]. 2020;110–6. https://doi.org/10.22159/ajpcr.2020.v13i10.38943

Haque A, Mumtaz S, Mumtaz R, Masood F, Buksh HA, Ahmed A et al. Assessment of knowledge, perceptions and perceived risk concerning COVID-19 in Pakistan. J Epidemiol Glob Health [Internet]. 2021;11(2):186–93. https://doi.org/10.2991/jegh.k.210109.001

Gupta P, Maheshwari S, Sinha R, Rawat P. Knowledge, attitude, and practice towards coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) among medical students: a cross-sectional study. J Acute Dis [Internet]. 2020;9(3):100. https://doi.org/10.4103/2221-6189.283886

Iqbal MA, Younas MZ. Public knowledge, attitudes, and practices towards COVID-19 in Pakistan: a cross-sectional study. Child Youth Serv Rev [Internet]. 2021;120(105784):105784. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2020.105784

Hossain MA, Jahid MIK, Hossain KMA, Walton LM, Uddin Z, Haque MO et al. Knowledge, attitudes, and fear of COVID-19 during the rapid rise period in Bangladesh. PLoS One [Internet]. 2020;15(9):e0239646. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0239646

Singh DR, Sunuwar DR, Karki K, Ghimire S, Shrestha N. Knowledge and perception towards universal safety precautions during early phase of the COVID-19 outbreak in Nepal. J Community Health [Internet]. 2020;45(6):1–7. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10900-020-00839-3

Mamun MA, Sakib N, Gozal D, Bhuiyan AI, Hossain S, Bodrud-Doza M et al. The COVID-19 pandemic and serious psychological consequences in Bangladesh: a population-based nationwide study. J Affect Disord [Internet]. 2021;279:462–72. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jad.2020.10.036

Aynalem YA, Akalu TY, Gebresellassie Gebregiorgis B, Sharew NT, Assefa HK, Shiferaw WS. Assessment of undergraduate student knowledge, attitude, and practices towards COVID-19 in Debre Berhan University, Ethiopia. PLoS One [Internet]. 2021;16(5):e0250444. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0250444

Fatima H, Oyetunji TP, Mishra S, Sinha K, Olorunsogbon OF, Akande OS et al. Religious coping in the time of COVID-19 Pandemic in India and Nigeria: finding of a cross-national community survey. Int J Soc Psychiatry [Internet]. 2022;68(2):309–15. https://doi.org/10.1177/0020764020984511

Feleke BT, Wale MZ, Yirsaw MT. Knowledge, attitude and preventive practice towards COVID-19 and associated factors among outpatient service visitors at Debre Markos compressive specialized hospital, north-west Ethiopia, 2020. PLoS ONE. 2021;16.

Odey GO, Alawad AGA, Atieno OS, Carew-Bayoh EO, Fatuma E, Ogunkola IO et al. COVID-19 pandemic: impacts on the achievements of Sustainable Development Goals in Africa. Pan Afr Med J [Internet]. 2021;38:251. https://doi.org/10.11604/pamj.2021.38.251.27065

Yue S, Zhang J, Cao M, Chen B. Knowledge, attitudes and practices of COVID-19 among urban and rural residents in China: A cross-sectional study. J Community Health [Internet]. 2021;46(2):286–91. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10900-020-00877-x

Estacio EV, Whittle R, Protheroe J. The digital divide: examining socio-demographic factors associated with health literacy, access and use of internet to seek health information. J Health Psychol [Internet]. 2019;24(12):1668–75. https://doi.org/10.1177/1359105317695429

Zhou Y, Singh N, Kaushik PD. The digital divide in rural South Asia: Survey evidence from Bangladesh, Nepal and Sri Lanka. IIMB Manag Rev [Internet]. 2011;23(1):15–29. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iimb.2010.12.002

Sultana MS, Khan AH, Islam MR, Hossain S, Tasdik Hasan M, Sikder MT. Gender differences in knowledge, attitudes and preparedness to respond to COVID-19 among adults in Bangladesh: a cross-sectional study. Popul Med [Internet]. 2022;4(January):1–11. https://doi.org/10.18332/popmed/145763

Mannan DKA, Mannan KA. Knowledge and perception towards novel Coronavirus (COVID 19) in Bangladesh. SSRN Electron J [Internet]. 2020; https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3576523

Huynh G, Nguyen TH, Tran V, Vo K, Vo V, Pham L. Knowledge and attitude toward COVID-19 among healthcare workers at District 2 Hospital, Ho Chi Minh City. Asian Pac J Trop Med [Internet]. 2020;13(6):260. https://doi.org/10.4103/1995-7645.280396

Booker CL, Kelly YJ, Sacker A. Gender differences in the associations between age trends of social media interaction and well-being among 10–15 year olds in the UK. BMC Public Health. 2018;18:1–2.

Sakr S, Ghaddar A, Sheet I, Eid AH, Hamam B. Knowledge, attitude and practices related to COVID-19 among young Lebanese population. BMC Public Health [Internet]. 2021;21(1):653. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-021-10575-5

Tran US, Hofer AA, Voracek M. Sex differences in general knowledge: meta-analysis and new data on the contribution of school-related moderators among high-school students. PLoS One [Internet]. 2014;9(10):e110391. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0110391

Abid M, Riaz M, Bano Z, Parveen T, Umar Fayyaz M, Sadia Qureshi H. Association between fear of COVID-19 and emotional distress in nurses with mediating role of Socio-demographic features. Front Psychol [Internet]. 2021;12:734623. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.734623

Li L, Wang F, Shui X, Liang Q, He J. Knowledge, attitudes, and practices towards COVID-19 among college students in China: a systematic review and meta-analysis. PLoS One [Internet]. 2022;17(6):e0270038. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0270038

Han Q, Zheng B, Cristea M, Agostini M, Bélanger JJ, Gützkow B et al. Trust in government regarding COVID-19 and its associations with preventive health behaviour and prosocial behaviour during the pandemic: a cross-sectional and longitudinal study. Psychol Med [Internet]. 2023;53(1):149–59. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0033291721001306

Rieger MO, Wang M. Trust in government actions during the COVID-19 crisis. Soc Indic Res [Internet]. 2022;159(3):967–89. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-021-02772-x

Bentzen JS. In crisis, we pray: Religiosity and the COVID-19 pandemic. J Econ Behav Organ [Internet]. 2021;192:541–83. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jebo.2021.10.014

Koenig HG. Maintaining health and well-being by putting faith into action during the COVID-19 pandemic. J Relig Health [Internet]. 2020;59(5):2205–14. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10943-020-01035-2

Roman NV, Mthembu TG, Hoosen M. Spiritual care-‘A deeper immunity’-A response to Covid-19 pandemic. Afr J Prim Health care Family Med. 2020;12:1–3.

DeRossett T, LaVoie DJ, Brooks D. Religious coping amidst a pandemic: Impact on COVID-19-related anxiety. J Relig Health [Internet]. 2021;60(5):3161–76. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10943-021-01385-5

Download references

Acknowledgements

We would like to acknowledge Joe Firth, who provided support throughout the review process.

This systematic review was supported by Pakistan Institute of Living and Learning under PROSPERO registration number CRD42021246475.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Department of Science, Technology, Engineering and Public Policy (STEaPP), University College London (UCL), London, UK

Rakhshi Memon, Veronica Ranieri & Sarah J. L. Edwards

Pakistan Institute of Living and Learning, Karachi, Pakistan

Ayesha Khaliq, Muqaddas Asif, Bilal Ahmad Khan, Nasim Chaudhry & Imran B. Chauhdry

University of York, York, UK

Mujeeb Masood Bhatti

Ziauddin University Hospital, Karachi, Pakistan

Imran B. Chauhdry

The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK

Imran B. Chauhdry & Nusrat Husain

Mersey Care NHS Foundation Trust, Liverpool, UK

Nusrat Husain

DOW University of Health Sciences, Karachi, Pakistan

Nasim Chaudhry & Imran B. Chauhdry

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

RM and SE were involved in conceptualisation, management, supervision, design, and planning of the review and literature searches.VR was involved in screening, data extraction, and quality checking. MA was involved in data extraction, quality checking and write-up. MMB was involved in data synthesis and analysis. AK was involved in screening, data extraction, quality checking, evaluation, and write-up. BA was involved in updating the search and screening the additional articles. NC, IBC, and NH provided scrutiny and edits to the manuscript. All authors reviewed and make significant contributions to the manuscript.Acknowledgements: We would like to acknowledge Mr Joe Firth, who provided support throughout the review process.

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Rakhshi Memon or Ayesha Khaliq .

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate.

Not Applicable.

Approval committee or the internal review board (IRB)

Not applicable.

Consent for publication

All authors have given their consent to publish this systematic review in BMC.

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ .

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Memon, R., Khaliq, A., Ranieri, V. et al. An examination of the relationship between risk perceptions, cultural-religious beliefs and coping during COVID-19 pandemic control in South Asian countries: a systematic review. BMC Psychol 12 , 461 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40359-024-01963-8

Download citation

Received : 09 June 2023

Accepted : 22 August 2024

Published : 31 August 2024

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1186/s40359-024-01963-8

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Religious- cultural belief

BMC Psychology

ISSN: 2050-7283

• General enquiries: [email protected]

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• HHS Author Manuscripts

The Role of Culture and Acculturation in Researchers’ Perceptions of Rules in Science

Alison l. antes.

Division of General Medical Sciences, Washington University School of Medicine, 4523 Clayton Avenue, Campus Box 8005, St. Louis, MO 63110, USA, 314-362-6006 (p), 314-454-5113 (f)

Tammy English

Department of Psychological & Brain Sciences, Washington University in St. Louis, One Brookings Drive, Campus Box 1125, St. Louis, MO 63130, USA, 314-935-3190 (p)

Kari A. Baldwin

Division of General Medical Sciences, Washington University School of Medicine, 4523 Clayton Avenue, Campus Box 8005, St. Louis, MO 63110, USA, 314-747-2703 (p), 314-454-5113 (f)

James M. DuBois

Division of General Medical Sciences, Washington University School of Medicine, 4523 Clayton Avenue, Campus Box 8005, St. Louis, MO 63110, USA, 314-747-2710 (p), 314-454-5113 (f)

Introduction and Background

A number of rules guide conduct in research in the United States (U.S.). These rules include federal research regulations and statutes, norms of science that enjoy a consensus in the research ethics literature, and professional ideals that researchers are encouraged to strive towards. The consequences of violating these different kinds of rules varies widely, from jail time or debarment from federal funding for data fabrication to the displeasure of peers or trainees for failing to be generous with one’s time. Thus, these rules and how researchers view them have significant implications for professional behavior in research. However, everyone performing research in the U.S. may not view the rules in the same manner, especially given the cultural diversity of researchers working in the U.S. Culture exerts a strong influence on how individuals interpret situations, select their actions, and view social interactions, as well as what they believe to be acceptable or unacceptable behaviors ( Knafo et al. 2011 ; Taylor et al. 2004 ; Resick et al. 2011 ; Markus and Kitayama 1991 ). Yet, the research community has largely overlooked the potential influence of culture on the perspectives and behavior of researchers.

Understanding the complex rules that guide scientific behavior in the U.S. requires knowing not only the content of the rules but the seriousness of violating different rules. Appreciating the seriousness of violating a rule requires recognizing how it is actually interpreted and applied in context, and this may be a more culturally sophisticated task than simply knowing the content of the rules. If U.S. researchers and their international counterparts perceive rules in science differently, this may put them at a disadvantage when collaborating internationally, or when working outside of their home countries. Our aim in this study was to identify how National Institutes of Health (NIH)-funded researchers working in the U.S. who were born in the U.S. and outside the U.S. perceive the rules in science as they are appraised in the U.S. context. Specifically, we examined how U.S.-born and non-U.S.-born researchers evaluated the seriousness of violations of regulations, norms, and ideals; how much they discriminated between these categories of rules; and how accurately they predicted the average U.S. Research Integrity Officer’s (RIO) evaluations of the seriousness of violations of the rules.

Rules in Scientific Research

Many rules, based on principles such as honesty, objectivity, openness, and respect, govern the work of researchers ( Shamoo and Resnik 2015 ). These rules address such practices as handling data, interacting with research participants, and reporting research results, and they are meant to foster the reliability of the scientific record and trust in the scientific enterprise ( DuBois 2004 ; Kreutzberg 2004 ; Shamoo and Resnik 2015 ). Failure to follow rules for responsible science can undermine scientific progress ( Korenman et al. 1998 ) and result in penalties to institutions or investigators ( DuBois et al. 2016a ). However, there is great variation in the seriousness of violating different rules in science, which is reflected in the variable enforcement of the rules and the different consequences associated with them ( DuBois 2004 ).

The variable nature of rules in science might puzzle a newcomer to research ( Pimple 2002 ). Indeed, the rules address issues from matters of life-and-death (e.g., rules for the protection of human participants in clinical trials) to professional etiquette (e.g., rules for interacting with colleagues) ( Pimple 2002 ; Steneck 2006 ). The rules expressed in government statutes and regulations in the U.S. have the force of law, and violations of these rules are often viewed as severe. Among these rules are laws regarding fabrication, falsification, and plagiarism (FFP). FFP constitute the U.S. federal definition of research misconduct ( Steneck 2007 ). U.S. federal regulations also address disclosure of conflicts of interest, the care and use of animal subjects, and the protection of human participants, though institutions rather than researchers often suffer the most severe penalties for failures in these domains ( DuBois 2004 ), and none are labeled as “research misconduct.”

In contrast, another set of norms in science serve as professional ideals or aspirations for behavior in research. They include guidelines for workplace civility and collegiality, and for social-mindedness ( Pimple 2002 ). As we have addressed them, they could also include personal aspirations for one’s research career such as publishing extensively in high-impact journals or serving on the committees of professional associations. These guidelines are not formally expressed in regulations and violations are rarely met with formal consequences ( Pimple 2002 ). For example, violations of collegiality could undermine trust and might result in attracting fewer collaborators or building less effective scientific teams ( Adams 2014 ), but violating such rules would not result in formal penalties from institutions or funding agencies.

A third set of rules is based on generally accepted scientific norms, such as pursuing knowledge impartially and sharing scientific findings openly ( Anderson et al. 2010 ). Thus, these rules address responsible practices for activities from assigning authorship to reporting research findings and performing peer review ( Macrina 2014 ). The significance assigned to these rules falls between research regulations and professional ideals. Such scientific norms may be stated formally in institutional policies or professional codes of ethics ( Macrina 2007 ), but they may also be informal, or even implicit. Behaviors that violate these norms are often known as “questionable research practices” ( John et al. 2012 ). Although scientists view violations of these rules as damaging to the scientific enterprise ( De Vries et al. 2006 ), they report relatively frequent violations of them ( John et al. 2012 ; Martinson et al. 2005 ). They also report ambiguity about following some of these rules in light of competing pressures in science and behaviors among scientists that are contradictory to scientific norms ( Anderson et al. 2007 ; De Vries et al. 2006 ). Furthermore, the consequences of violating these norms are often mild or unobservable.

In principle, following the rules in science is straightforward. This is a matter of knowing the rules and applying them in the decisions and actions in one’s work. In practice, this may not be so simple. Researchers are often busy and distracted from compliance; they compete with each other for funding; they may delegate tasks to staff, trainees or peers who may not know or be committed to following the rules; and they may feel pressure to take short cuts to increase productivity ( Anderson and Adam 2014 ; DuBois et al. 2016a ; Martinson et al. 2009 ). When establishing priorities for one’s scarce time, or deciding which shortcuts can be taken without significant harm to one’s career, it may be vital to understand diverse rules and norms as well as the significance attached to them. One might hope that researchers internalize the norms and values of science; nevertheless, oversight, punishment and reward systems also deeply influence professional behavior ( Anderson and Adam 2014 ; DuBois 2004 ).

Culture and the Global Context of Research

Culture shapes people’s patterns of thinking and the standards that guide their behavior ( Heine and Ruby 2010 ; Taras et al. 2010 ). Among the most widely studied topics in cultural research includes the value orientations of individuals from different cultures, and in particular, individualism versus collectivism ( Aycan and Gelfand 2012 ; Knafo et al. 2011 ; Taras et al. 2010 ; Triandis 1995 ). Individualistic, Western cultures in North America and Western Europe tend to emphasize independence and the pursuit of personal achievements. On the other hand, collectivistic, Eastern cultures found in Asian nations tend to focus on interdependence and the interests of the group ( Oyserman et al. 2002 ; Triandis 2001 ). In the workplace setting, culture influences people’s views, practices, and interactions, such as their approaches to teamwork, strategies for negotiation, and attitudes to leadership ( Dickson et al. 2003 ; Gelfand et al. 2013 ; Ralston et al. 1997 ; Ramesh and Gelfand 2010 ; Aycan and Gelfand 2012 ). However, only recently have members of the scientific community begun to consider the role of culture in the work of researchers and in research integrity ( Heitman 2014 ; Hwang 2013 ; InterAcademy Parternership 2016 ; Steele, Johnson, Watts, MacDougall, Mumford, Connelly, & Williams, 2016 ; Nho 2016 ; Steneck 2013 ). Scholars have considered the need for cultural sensitivity with regard to culturally diverse research participants ( Benatar 2000 ; Calamaro 2008 ; Marshall 2008 ), but generally have not examined such issues among culturally diverse researchers working together.

This limited attention is notable given that approximately 25% of the academic research faculty in science and engineering in the U.S. was born internationally ( National Science Foundation 2014 ). Estimates suggest that between 50 and 60% of the internationally born scientists and engineers in the U.S. workforce are from Asian nations ( Kent 2011 ; National Science Foundation 2014 ). Furthermore, global collaborations, co-authorship, and training programs are on the rise, and about half of the post-doctoral fellows in the U.S. are international ( Boesz and Lloyd 2008 ; Garrison et al. 2005 ; Heitman 2014 ; National Science Foundation 2014 ).

Cross-cultural differences in research policy, practices, and professional interactions may shape different practices and views with regard to scientific integrity ( Boesz and Lloyd 2008 ; Heitman 2014 ; Nho 2016 ). Work by Heitman and Litewka (2011) , for example, highlighted cultural differences concerning the practice of plagiarism. Plagiarism is taken very seriously in the U.S.; indeed it is part of the federal definition of research misconduct. However, international researchers may observe it commonly practiced in their home countries, be unfamiliar with policies formally and clearly defining it, or have different perspectives about intellectual property and authorship ( Heitman and Litewka 2011 ). An Indian scientist contended that educational practices, such as teaching students to restate answers exactly, might contribute to plagiarism among Indian students and scientists ( Chaurasia 2016 ). He also noted the contrast between the minor response to plagiarism in India versus nations like the U.S. where plagiarism seriously jeopardizes a scientist’s career ( Chaurasia 2016 ). Some evidence suggests that international and U.S. doctoral students differ in their acceptance of the norms of academic research in the U.S., which led the researchers to speculate that perhaps such normative orientations are shaped prior to doctoral studies ( Anderson and Louis 1994 ). More broadly, cultures differ with regard to placing respect in rules (rule-based cultures) versus authority figures (relationship-based cultures) to regulate behavior within their society ( Hooker 2009 ; Pitta et al. 1999 ). As a result, behaviors viewed as corrupt in rule-based, Western cultures may be acceptable in relationship-based, non-Western cultures, and vice versa ( Hooker 2009 ).

There is also modest evidence that international researchers are overrepresented in cases of research misconduct in the U.S. The senior author of the present study is the director of a remediation training program for researchers referred by their universities for failures in research compliance or integrity (e.g., violations of human or animal subjects protocols, plagiarism, or data fabrication). A slight majority of researchers referred have been international ( DuBois et al. 2016a ). This reflects twice as many international researchers attending the program than expected based on the proportion of the international, faculty-level researchers working in the U.S. The course instructors offered an analysis of the root causes and suggested that at least some of the problems stemmed from differences in views about appropriate interactions in a research lab. For example, failure to provide adequate oversight of a post-doctoral researcher was linked to a lab director’s concern that reviewing the post-doc’s data and analyses would indicate mistrust ( DuBois et al. 2016a ). We propose these influences—different research policies, practices, interaction styles, and cultural values—may explain the cultural difference we observed in prior research among NIH-funded researchers working in the U.S. on a measure of professional decision-making ( DuBois et al. 2016b ; Antes et al. 2016 ). The measure requires individuals to interpret and apply rules and norms for responsible research in the U.S., and being born outside of the U.S. was associated with lower performance on the professional decision-making measure. More broadly, research suggests that cultural differences in individuals’ reasoning styles and perceptual processes influence social judgments and approaches to problems ( Nisbett and Miyamoto 2005 ; Peng and Nisbett 1999 ; Sachdeva et al. 2011 ), and therefore might influence approaches to professional decision-making.

The Present Study

In the present study, we examined whether cultural differences exist in researchers’ perceptions of rules in science in the U.S. research context. Researchers operationalize culture according to visible characteristics, such as nation of birth, or underlying characteristics, such as values ( Ayman & Korabika 2010 ). In this study, we operationalized culture according to nation of birth, grouping researchers born outside of the U.S., primarily in Asian nations, together. This allows a general comparison of cultures broadly considered Eastern and Western. Although this approach is commonly applied, it is limited in that it simply classifies individuals into groups; if differences are identified, it does not permit deeper analysis of precisely why ( Soares, Farhangmehr, & Shoham 2007 ).

Our aim was to explore whether U.S.-born and non-U.S.-born researchers differ in their perceptions of rules. First, we examined U.S.-born and non-U.S.-born researchers’ evaluations of the seriousness of violations of research regulations, scientific norms, and professional ideals. Next, we examined whether U.S.-born and non-U.S.-born researchers differed in how much they discriminated between the rule categories in their evaluations of seriousness. As described in the introduction, the three rule categories are fairly distinct in the U.S. research setting, however, we expected that discerning between the rule categories is a somewhat culturally bound task. For example, U.S.-born researchers are working in their home nation, and thus the distinctions might be more discernable, potentially due to greater alignment with their personal views or to more readily recognizing how the rules are applied in research—e.g., which rules are followed, which are not, and the nature of consequences associated with violations of the rules. Thus, our first two research questions included:

• RQ1: Do researchers working in the U.S. who were born in the U.S. versus outside of the U.S. differ in their evaluations of the seriousness of violations of research regulations, scientific norms, and professional ideals?
• RQ2: Do researchers working in the U.S. who were born in the U.S. versus outside of the U.S. differ in how much they discriminate in their evaluations between research regulations, scientific norms, and professional ideals?

To further explore the proposition that recognizing how research rules are viewed and applied in the U.S. might be a culturally bound task, we also examined the U.S.-born and non-U.S.-born researchers’ predictions of how the average U.S. Research Integrity Officer (RIO) would evaluate the seriousness of violations of the rules. We asked researchers to predict how RIOs would evaluate the seriousness of violations of the rules. While having personal views similar to that of RIOs might facilitate this task, in principle, one could accurately perform this task to the extent that they recognize how RIOs—individuals charged with fostering research integrity and responding to research misconduct—might view the seriousness of each category of rules. We anticipated that these judgments might be easier for those born in the U.S. leading to greater accuracy. Again, the mechanisms noted above might explain potential differences: more personal similarity in perceptions, or greater ease in identifying how rules are applied in context. Thus, our third research question included:

• RQ3: Do researchers working in the U.S. who were born in the U.S. versus outside of the U.S. differ in the accuracy with which they predict RIOs’ evaluations of the seriousness of violations of the categories of rules?

If we observe that perceptions of rules in science differ by nation of origin, then it is pertinent to ask whether the influence of culture persists or changes as researchers become acculturated to the U.S. Although culture is a deeply rooted influence on human psychology and behavior, it is not necessarily static. As individuals are exposed to the culture of a host nation, particularly if they are educated there, acculturation occurs ( Taras et al. 2013 ). Although it is typically a slow process, acculturation facilitates adjustment to the new culture and well-being ( Sam and Berry 2010 ; Taras et al. 2013 ). Of course, the passage of time in a host country is necessary for acculturation, but it involves deeper psychological and behavioral change in which individuals adopt the norms and patterns of behavior of the new culture ( Birman and Simon 2014 ). Acculturation requires acquiring language proficiency, engaging in the cuisine, entertainment, sporting, and media activities central to the host culture, and feeling connected to and a sense of belonging in the new culture ( Lu et al. 2016 ; Mendenhall and Oddou 1985 ). Thus, our fourth research question included:

• RQ4: Does acculturation to the U.S. explain differences in researchers’ discrimination between categories of rules or the accuracy of their predictions of RIOs’ evaluations of the rules?

Finally, we explored the potential for two additional variables to play a role in explaining perceptions of rules in science: amount of research experience and education in research ethics. We asked two additional questions, which included:

• RQ5: Does the level of research experience influence a researchers’ discrimination between the categories of rules or the accuracy of their predictions of RIOs’ evaluations of the rules?
• RQ6: Does education in research ethics influence researchers’ discrimination between the categories of rules or the accuracy of their predictions of RIOs’ evaluations of the rules?

The many aspects of responsible research might be puzzling for researchers, especially for newcomers to the scientific enterprise ( Pimple 2002 ). However, presumably experience working in research increases clarity regarding rules in science. With experience in a profession, people gain knowledge, not just technical knowledge about how to perform the work, but practical knowledge concerning professional problems and strategies for addressing these challenges ( Mumford et al. 2009a ). Indeed the purpose of socialization into a professional field is to encourage individuals to adopt the norms of the profession ( Fisher et al. 2009a ). Thus, we anticipated that more experience in research might be associated with greater distinctions in the seriousness of violating rules and more accuracy in predictions of RIOs’ evaluations. Moreover, participation in research ethics education might be associated with an enhanced perception of rules. Theoretically, effective research ethics instruction would relate to a more sophisticated understanding of rules in science, reflected in discrimination between rule categories and accuracy in predicting RIOs’ evaluations. We examined these research questions in a sample of NIH-funded researchers and trainees born in the U.S. and internationally.

Participants

Nih-funded researchers.

Two hundred and three NIH-funded researchers participated in this study. Fifty-four percent were male. Fifty percent were born in the U.S. ( n = 101) and the remaining were born outside of the U.S. ( n = 102). Of the non-U.S.-born participants, 82% were born in Asia. Participants reported their ethnicity as Asian (53%), White (46%), and Black (2%). Sixty percent indicated that English was their native language, while 40% indicated English was a second language. The majority (59%) were in their 30s, and 25% were in their 40s—the remaining were in their 20s (6%), 50s (8%), or 60+ (2%).

Participants reported all of their graduate degrees: 86% indicated a research doctorate (e.g., PhD, ScD), 21% a professional doctorate (e.g., MD, DO), and 18% a master’s degree (e.g., MPH, MS). Most participants earned their graduate degrees in the U.S. (89% of research doctorates, 81% of professional doctorates, and 97% of master’s degrees). Their academic ranks included post-doctoral trainee (35%), instructor (6%), assistant professor (37%), associate professor (9%), and full professor (10%); 3% selected “other”. Participants selected each type of research that was relevant to describe their work: 38% indicated human subjects social/behavioral, 33% human subjects clinical, 40% animal subjects, 21% dry lab, 59% wet lab, and 2% “other”. (Overall, 46% of the sample performed human subjects research.) Participants reported that they had conducted research for an average of 12.24 years ( SD = 7.86; range 1 – 45 years). On average, participants had worked in 4 research labs or groups in their career thus far ( SD = 1.63; range 1 – 12 labs/groups).

One hundred and twelve research institutional officials participated. Nearly all were born in the U.S. (89%) and reported English as their native language (92%). The most common age for the officials was 60 years old or older (39%), followed by 30% in their 50s, 23% in their 40s, and the remaining 8% were 39 years old or younger. A slight majority (56%) were male. We asked the officials to indicate their professional title by indicating if there were a “Research Integrity Officer”, “Research Compliance Officer”, or “Other”. (They indicated all that applied; thus their professional titles add to more than 100%.) Research Integrity Officer was the most common title (51%), and 28% indicated that their title was Research Compliance Officer. Additionally, 46% reported “Other” and provided a title such as Chief Research Officer or Director of Research Integrity. The average years they reported being in the position ranged from 0.5 years to 39 years with an average of 7.5 years ( SD = 7.0).

Recruitment and Procedure

We identified principal investigators (PIs) and post-doctoral trainees funded by NIH through the NIH RePORTER database using criterion-based sampling. Specifically, we sought individuals across career stages (post-doctoral trainees, early career junior faculty, and mid-career and senior faculty) who were U.S.-born and non-U.S.-born. We searched one grant mechanism—fellowship (F) grants for postdoctoral trainees, career development (K) grants for junior investigators, and research (R01) grants for mid-career and senior investigators—at a time for active projects within a given year and narrowed the search by award notice date, pulling all individuals into our recruitment database until we reached a sampling frame large enough to meet our enrollment goals.

We obtained individuals’ names, institutions, and email addresses from the project information provided by RePORTER. Using online web searches, we identified individuals’ phone numbers, gender, and English as a second language (ESL) status. We aimed to constitute a sample that was about 50% U.S.-born and 50% born outside of the U.S. In 2009, the majority of international researchers (about 60%) working in the U.S. were from Asian backgrounds, primarily China and India ( Kent 2011 ). Therefore, in this initial study of cultural differences among researchers, we aimed for the group of non-U.S. researchers to be comprised of individuals from Asian nations in order to reflect the group of international researchers mostly commonly represented among those working in the U.S. As defined by NIH and the U.S. Office of Management and Budget, Asian individuals come from the Far East, Southeast Asia, or the Indian subcontinent; for example, Cambodia, China, India, Japan, Korea, Malaysia, Pakistan, the Philippine Islands, Thailand, and Vietnam ( National Institues of Health RePORT 2012 ; Office of Management and Budget 1997 ). Although Asian nations are heterogeneous, defining the groups in our sample in this manner allowed us to examine the influence of being from an Asian nation compared to being from the U.S., while identifying a population sufficiently large to enable us to meet enrollment goals. As we constructed our recruitment database, we used Asian surnames to estimate whether investigators or trainees were from an Asian background ( Shah et al. 2010 ; Wong et al. 2010 ), in addition to biographical information posted online.

Recruitment consisted of emailing an initial invitation to a cohort of 883 researchers asking them to participate in a study that aimed to learn more about how NIH-funded researchers and trainees perceive research rules, norms, and values in science and think about research. The announcement indicated that the study would take one hour or less, and that participants would receive $50 for participating. We sent up to three reminder emails and made follow-up calls to investigators who had not participated. We monitored the demographic information reported by participants, specifically nation of birth and level of research experience, so that in the second round of recruitment we could send invitations to a cohort of potential participants in a targeted fashion. For example, if participation among senior investigators lagged behind junior investigators, we sent more recruitment invitations to senior investigators. The second cohort of recruitment included 179 individuals. In all, we approached 1062 individuals through our recruitment email. This excludes 42 invalid emails that did not reach the intended recipients. The survey platform does not indicate how many emails were definitely opened and how many went to junkmail. Therefore, the response rate based on raw emails sent was 19%. The survey platform does indicate how many of the survey links were accessed. Thus, of the 316 individuals who clicked on the survey link to access the study and view the initial informed consent information, the response rate was 64%. In past research with the same recruitment strategy, the response rate of those we know opened the email was 30% ( Antes et al. 2016 ); thus we anticipate the true response rate is likely about 30%.

We also recruited Research Integrity Officers (RIOs) from the 218 doctoral granting research-intensive universities in the U.S. (i.e., those designated as highest or higher research activity by the Carnegie Classification of Institutions of Higher Education) ( Center for Postsecondary Research 2016 ). Recruitment of RIOs focused on identifying the individual with a title most closely resembling “Research Integrity Officer” at each university. We located the names, email addresses, and phone numbers of individuals with these titles using university websites. We sent recruitment invitations via email and up to three follow-up emails. The announcement invited individuals to participate in a survey that would take 3–5 minutes that aimed to learn more about how research administrators perceive rules and norms, and think about research. We provided no incentive for participation to this group of participants. The response rate among RIOs was 51%.

The recruitment email messages sent to investigators, trainees, and RIOs included a link to the study hosted via the online survey platform Qualtrics. The investigators and trainees completed all of the measures described in the measures section. Additionally, they completed measures of work values, personal values, professional decision-making, and exposure to unprofessional research practices. This report focuses on the findings with regard to rules in science. The RIOs completed only the Evaluating Rules in Science Task, as their evaluations served as a comparison for the evaluations made by researchers.

Evaluating Rules in Science Task (ERST)

We developed the ERST for this study, which assesses how researchers and RIOs perceive the severity of violations of research regulations, scientific norms, and professional ideals. The ERST consists of 18-items (see Appendix ) that are short statements describing research regulations (e.g., “Give credit when using the words of other people”), scientific norms (e.g., “Read and approve the final text of articles when listed as an author”), or professional ideals (e.g., “Be available to colleagues who need assistance”). The regulations, norms, and ideals scales each consist of six items. The research regulations items covered the topics of plagiarism, data falsification, complying with mandated training requirements, effort reporting, disclosure of conflicts of interest, and sharing data when required by funding agencies. The norms items included reading and approving final manuscripts when listed as an author, being objective in peer review, completely describing analyses in publications, reporting initial hypotheses regardless of results, and backing up data. The ideals were intentionally written to support discrimination among items. For example, a sample item includes, “Work hard to produce publications in high quality journals.” The items were meant to represent positive aspirations, but of the sort that few would consider to be obligations that apply to all situations or trump regulations or norms of science when they conflict; hence, an isolated violation (e.g., refusing to join a committee) would be viewed as more minor than a violation of a regulation or norm of science.

The ERST presents the statements describing regulations, norms, and ideals in a mixed order. The instructions ask participants to rate how serious they personally consider a violation of each rule or ideal on a 6-point scale of 1 ( not at all serious ), 2 ( somewhat serious ), 3 ( moderately serious ), 4 ( serious ), 5 ( very serious ), to 6 ( extremely serious ). Researchers and RIOs completed this task. The researchers also completed a second task. They rated how serious they thought an average compliance officer working at their institution would consider a violation of each statement on the same 6-point scale. The Cronbach’s alpha coefficients indicated that the scales demonstrated satisfactory reliability. (For ratings of seriousness among investigators, regulations = .68, norms = .68, and ideals = .82. For RIOs’ ratings of seriousness, regulations = .80, norms = .80, and ideals = .86. For researchers’ predictions of RIOs’ ratings, regulations = .78, norms = .84, and ideals =.87).

The item development procedure for the ERST included identifying regulations and norms that pertain to all researchers working on federally-funded research in the U.S., regardless of their scientific field. For example, we did not include regulations that would be specific to research with human subjects, select agents, or animal research. We conducted a literature review using leading textbooks on research integrity and the responsible conduct of research ( Burroughs Wellcome Fund, Howard Hughes Medical Institute 2006 ; Macrina 2014 ; National Academies of Science 2009 ; Shamoo and Resnik 2015 ; Steneck 2007 ) and reviews of these materials to identify relevant regulations and norms ( DuBois et al. 2010 ; Kon et al. 2011 ). We expected that violations of most regulations and norms would be rated as somewhat serious; thus including professional ideals allowed us to further assess how much researchers distinguished across the three categories.

After the literature review, two members of the research team (A.L.A. and J.M.D.) drafted items. Next, all four authors met to review and revise the draft items and create new items as necessary. The team met three times for item writing. A research team member (K.A.B.) then conducted interviews with two regulatory experts at Washington University in St. Louis to verify that the regulation items did articulate regulatory or legal requirements of researchers. We also asked them whether the items captured all major requirements that pertained to all researchers regardless of their specific scientific discipline. The expert review lead to minor revisions of the items.

We conducted cognitive interviews with individuals similar to our target participants to ensure the clarity and face validity of the items ( Beatty and Willis 2007 ). We interviewed seven researchers representing diverse fields and career stages, and we included researchers from outside of the U.S. First, we asked participants to read the items on the ERST and share their general impressions. We asked whether the instructions were clear, and whether they would feel comfortable addressing the items. Next, we asked them to describe what they though each item was about, and whether they would have difficulty responding to any items. The interviewer recorded notes and compiled the results for the item development team. Generally, the feedback indicated that the items were clear and required only minor revisions. We met twice after the cognitive interviews to revise and finalize the wording of the items. Finally, we computed Lexile scores for the items to approximate their reading level. The average Lexile score was 860; for reference, the interquartile range of Lexile scores for sixth graders in the U.S. is 690–1020 ( MetaMetrics, 2016 ).

From the researchers’ ratings of how serious they personally viewed the ERST items, we computed rule seriousness scores for the three scales (i.e., research regulations, scientific norms, and professional ideals) by averaging the six items from each. In addition, we computed a seriousness score from the two specific items within the 6-item research regulations scale that constitute the federal definition of research misconduct, namely plagiarism and falsification, and called this scale “research misconduct regulations.” These two behaviors are generally punished much more severely than, say, failures to complete training requirements or to share data, and they are the primary focus of the work of RIOs.

To test our question as to whether U.S.-born and non-U.S.-born researchers differ in their discrimination of the seriousness of violating different categories of rules, we computed “rule discrimination” scores by taking the absolute difference between the researchers’ aggregate seriousness scores for each pairwise comparison (e.g., regulations versus ideals). This calculation produced five discrimination scores: research regulations versus professional ideals, research misconduct regulations versus professional ideals, research regulations versus scientific norms, research misconduct regulations versus scientific norms, and scientific norms versus professional ideals. The range of possible scores is 0 to 5. Larger discrimination scores represent greater discrimination between the seriousness of violations of the categories of rules.

An additional score generated from the ERST was the accuracy of the researchers’ predictions of RIOs’ ratings of the seriousness of rule violations. We computed these scores first at the item-level, taking the absolute difference of the researchers’ predictions for each item minus the average rating provided by the RIOs, and then aggregated them by averaging them across the items from each of the four scales. For ease of interpretation, we reverse coded these scores so higher accuracy scores reflect more accuracy. The range of possible accuracy scores is 0 to 5. An accuracy score of five would indicate complete concordance between the researcher’s prediction and the average rating provided by RIOs. An accuracy score of zero would indicate complete discordance between the researcher’s prediction and the average rating provided by RIOs. The alpha reliability estimates for the accuracy scores included: regulations = .60, norms = .74, and ideals = .64. Attenuated reliability estimates are common when the component measures of difference scores are positively correlated. In turn, these scores will yield attenuated relationships with other variables. Thus, we must bear this in mind when interpreting our findings.

General Ethnicity Questionnaire

We measured acculturation with the 38-item abridged version of the General Ethnicity Questionnaire with American culture as the reference culture ( Tsai et al. 2000 ). The first 25 items of the measure ask participants to indicate their level of agreement, on a 1 ( strongly disagree ) to 5 ( strongly agree ) scale, with statements about behaviors, practices, and preferences in a culture. Example items include: “I celebrate American holidays” and “I am proud of American culture”. The remaining 13 items ask participants to indicate how much, on a 1 ( not at all ) to 5 ( very much ) scale, they perform certain behaviors (e.g., “How much do you speak English with friends?”) and how fluently they speak, read, write, and understand English (e.g., “How fluently do you read English?”). We reverse-coded one item (“I am embarrassed/ashamed of American culture”) so that higher values reflect greater orientation to American culture, then averaged across all responses to computed acculturation scores. The Cronbach’s alpha in our sample was .92.

Demographic Questionnaire

We used a brief background questionnaire to gather demographic information to characterize our sample and to capture nationality, experience in research, and hours of research ethics education. Participants were asked whether they were born in the United States. We used responses to this question to create comparison groups for our analyses. As noted in the introduction, grouping individuals according to being born in the U.S. versus outside of the U.S. allowed us to classify our sample into groups for comparison, but does not take into account potential differences among distinct cultures represented within these broad groupings. We also asked participants not born in the U.S. to indicate in which region they were born and in what nation they obtained their graduate degrees. We used responses to this question to characterize our sample, but we did not have adequate sample size within specific regions to analyze the data at the level of individual regions.

The demographic questionnaire also asked participants to indicate their academic rank (i.e., postdoctoral trainee, instructor, assistant professor, associate professor, or professor). Using their response, we created a trainee status variable to represent those who were post-doctoral trainees versus faculty to use as a measure of their experience in research. We additionally used their responses to the number of years of experience they had working in research (which we defined as years doing research that led to their own and others’ publications) as another measure of experience.

Finally, the questionnaire asked participants to estimate how many hours of research ethics instruction they had completed. The prompt indicated to include instruction on RCR (Responsible Conduct of Research), human subjects protection, HIPAA (Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act) patient privacy, animal care and use, and other topics commonly identified as “research ethics.” We used this estimate of hours of education ( M = 30.85, SD = 26.20) as a continuous variable to explore its relationship with the outcomes. A self-report measure of hours of participation in ethics instruction may be limited, but lending to its validity, this estimate (collected using the same question) correlated with conducting clinical human subjects research in a sample of 400 NIH-funded investigators ( Antes et al. 2016 ). This group, indeed, generally has more hours of required training.

Data Analysis

We performed all analyses using both the 6-item research regulations scores and the 2-item research misconduct regulations scores. First, we examined the correlations of the potential predictor variables—nation of origin, acculturation, trainee status, years of experience in research, and hours of ethics instruction—with the primary outcome variables: rule discrimination and prediction accuracy.

Second, we examined our research question regarding potential differences between U.S.-born and non-U.S.-born researchers in discrimination between the seriousness of different categories of rules. To do so, we performed a repeated measures analysis of variance (RM-ANOVA) using the seriousness scores for the research regulations, scientific norms, and professional ideals scales as the outcome variables and nation of origin, rule category, and the nation of origin by rule category interaction as the predictor variables. In a separate analysis, we included the seriousness scores for the research misconduct regulations, scientific norms, and professional ideals scales as the outcome variables. Follow-up t-tests on the rule discrimination scores were conducted to understand the specific nature of any significant differences. We report Cohen’s d effect size estimates for the group differences. Traditional interpretations of Cohen’s d effect sizes include 0.20 = small, 0.50 = medium, and 0.80 = large (Cohen, 1988; Lakens, 2013).

Third, we examined our research question regarding potential differences between U.S.-born and non-U.S.-born researchers in prediction accuracy. Like the analyses for rule discrimination, we performed two RM-ANOVAs. The first analysis included the prediction accuracy scores for the research regulations, scientific norms, and professional ideals as the outcome variables and nation of origin, rule category, and the nation of origin by rule category interaction as the predictor variables. The second analysis included the prediction accuracy scores for the research misconduct regulations, scientific norms, and professional ideals as the outcome variables. We performed follow-up t-tests on the prediction accuracy scores to understand the specific nature of significant differences and calculated Cohen’s d effect size estimates.

Finally, to address whether acculturation explained any observed differences in rule discrimination or prediction accuracy between the U.S.-born and non-U.S.-born groups, we performed follow-up repeated measures analysis of covariance (RM-ANCOVA) tests. These analyses were identical to the RM-ANOVA procedures described above with the exception that acculturation and the acculturation by rule category interaction were added as predictors.

Research Ethics

This study was conducted in accordance with ethical standards for research with human participants. The Institutional Review Board at Washington University in St. Louis reviewed and approved the study (ID#201511060). All participants received an informed consent form before indicating their consent to participate and proceeding to the study procedures.

Correlations

Table 1 presents the correlations of researchers’ rule discrimination and prediction accuracy scores with the predictor variables. Nation of origin correlated positively with rule discrimination. Being from the U.S. was associated with greater discrimination between the seriousness of all categories of rules, with the exception of research regulations versus scientific norms. Likewise, nation of origin correlated positively with prediction accuracy, except accuracy of predictions regarding scientific norms. Individuals from the U.S. were more accurate in their predictions of RIOs’ judgments of the seriousness of the categories of rules. Acculturation also correlated positively with rule discrimination; specifically distinguishing between research regulations and professional ideals, research misconduct regulations and professional ideals, and research misconduct regulations and scientific norms. Acculturation also correlated positively with accuracy of predictions of RIOs’ ratings of violations of research regulations and research misconduct regulations.

Correlations of Hypothesized Predictors with Researchers’ Rule Discrimination and Prediction Accuracy Scores

Notes. N = 203. Variable codes for Nation of Origin: 0 = non-U.S.-born, 1 = U.S.-born; Variable codes for Trainee Status: 0 = not a trainee, 1 = trainee.

Hours of instruction in ethics did not correlate with rule discrimination or prediction accuracy. Thus, the response to RQ6 appears to be no; using a basic measure of ethics education, education does not predict discrimination or accuracy. Trainee status correlated positively with rule discrimination and prediction accuracy, but to a lesser degree than nation of origin and acculturation; generally demonstrating fewer statistically significant correlations and correlations of smaller magnitudes. Nonetheless, being a post-doctoral trainee versus faculty correlated with greater rule discrimination and predictions that were more accurate. However, we had anticipated that more experience in research would be associated with greater discrimination and accuracy. We suspected that perhaps the trainee status variable may not be an adequate measure of low versus high levels of experience in research. Indeed, the trainee group had over 8 years ( M = 8.21, SD = 2.71) of research experience, and non-trainees over 14 years ( M = 14.40, SD = 8.82) of experience. However, the continuous variable “years doing research” as a second measure of experience also revealed modest correlations with some outcomes: it correlated negatively with prediction accuracy for research regulations and research misconduct regulations, but did not correlate with rule discrimination. This was, again, in the direction opposite of that anticipated. Thus, in response to RQ5, the pattern of finding suggested a modest and mixed relationship of experience in research with the outcomes. Given the tenuous relationship of these measures of experience with the outcomes and the stronger pattern among the key predictors of interest, nation of origin and acculturation, we focused the remainder of our report of findings on the research questions regarding nation of origin and acculturation.

Researchers’ Seriousness Scores and Rule Discrimination

In Table 2 , we report the means and standard deviations for researchers’ ratings of the seriousness of violations for each category of rules. As anticipated, all researchers rated violations of research regulations as the most serious, followed by scientific norms and professional ideals. Although this basic pattern was consistent among U.S.-born and non-U.S.-born researchers, the degree of seriousness attributed to the categories of rules (with the exception of research regulations) differed between the groups. Specifically, U.S.-born researchers rated the research misconduct regulations higher and the scientific norms and professional ideals lower than the non-U.S.-born researchers. As shown in Table 2 , the differences between the groups for research misconduct regulations and professional ideals were statistically significant ( p < .01).

Researchers’ Seriousness Scores

M = Mean. SD = Standard Deviation. Possible range of scores: 1 (not at all serious) to 6 (extremely serious).

The RM-ANOVA tests on the seriousness scores indicated that there was a significant main effect of rule category, F (2, 402) = 667.98, p < .001. More central to our research question, there was also a main effect of nation of origin, F (1, 201) = 5.90, p < .05, and a significant nation of origin by rule category interaction, F (2, 402) = 17.54, p < .001. In the parallel analysis using seriousness scores for the narrower research misconduct regulations scale compared to scientific norms and professional ideals, there was a main effect of rule category, F (2, 402) = 882.58, p < .001 and a significant nation of origin by rule category interaction, F (2, 402) = 28.03, p < .001; the main effect of nation of origin was not statistically significant, F (1, 201) = 2.52, p = .114.

Follow-up t-tests (presented in Table 3 ) revealed that, with the exception of research regulations versus scientific norms, U.S.-born researchers made greater distinctions between the seriousness of violations of the different categories of rules than non-U.S.-born researchers ( p < .001). Thus, in response to RQ1, the findings suggest that U.S.-born versus non-U.S.-born researchers differed in their evaluations of the seriousness of violations of the categories of rules. In particular, U.S.-born researchers rated violations of research misconduct regulations as more serious than non-U.S.-born researchers, while non-U.S.-born researchers rated violations of professional ideals as more serious than U.S.-born researchers. In keeping with the findings for seriousness scores, the findings with regard to RQ2 indicate that U.S.-born researchers discriminated more between the seriousness of violating different categories of rules. For example, U.S.-born researchers perceived a much greater difference between the seriousness of violations of research misconduct regulations versus professional ideals than non-U.S.-born researchers.

Researchers’ Rule Discrimination Scores

M = Mean. SD = Standard Deviation. Possible range of scores: 0 (no discrimination) to 5 (complete discrimination).

RIOs’ Seriousness Ratings and Researchers’ Prediction Accuracy

Table 4 presents the means and standard deviations for the RIOs’ evaluations of the seriousness of violations for each category of rules. Additionally, the table provides the means and standard deviations of the researchers’ predictions of the RIOs’ evaluations. As anticipated, the RIOs evaluated research regulations as most serious, followed by scientific norms and professional ideals.

Research RIOs’ Seriousness Scores and Researchers’ Predictions of Their Scores

In Table 5 , we report the researchers’ prediction accuracy means and standard deviations for each rule category. The RM-ANOVA procedures examining accuracy scores indicated that there were significant main effects of rule category, F (2, 402) = 70.52, p < .001, and nation of origin, F (1, 201) = 7.28, p < .01. The nation of origin by rule category interaction approached statistical significance, F (2, 402) = 2.49, p = .084. A similar pattern was found in the parallel analysis focusing on the narrower research misconduct regulations, scientific norms, and professional ideals: there were significant main effects of rule category, F (2, 402) = 25.13, p < .001 and nation of origin, F (1, 201) = 8.16, p < .01, and the nation of origin by rule category interaction approached significance, F (2, 402) = 2.70, p = .069.

Researchers’ Prediction Accuracy

M = Mean. SD = Standard Deviation. Possible range of scores: 0 (completely inaccurate) to 5 (completely accurate).

Presented in Table 5 are the follow-up t-tests on the accuracy scores to determine the specific differences between the U.S.-born and non-U.S.-born groups. U.S.-born researchers were more accurate than non-U.S.-born researchers in their predictions for research regulations, research misconduct regulations, and professional ideals. There was no difference between the groups in terms of accuracy for scientific norms. Therefore, in response to RQ3, U.S.-born researchers were more accurate in their predictions of RIOs’ views of the seriousness of violating different categories of rules than researchers born outside of the U.S.

Acculturation to the U.S. and Researchers’ Seriousness Ratings

When we included acculturation as a covariate in the analysis of seriousness ratings for research regulations, scientific norms, and professional ideals, the effects we identified in the original analysis remained. Specifically, the main effect for nation of origin, F (1, 200) = 5.41, p < .05, the main effect for rule category, F (2, 400) = 6.12, p < .01, and the interaction of nation of origin and rule category, F (2, 400) = 11.28, p < .001, remained statistically significant. Neither the acculturation main effect, F (1, 200) = 0.26, p = .614, nor the acculturation by rule category interaction, F (2, 400) = 0.80, p = .450, were statistically significant.

Similarly, in the analysis of seriousness ratings that included research misconduct regulations, scientific norms, and professional ideals, the original effects remained, with the exception of the effect of nation of origin. Specifically, rule category, F (2, 400) = 5.90, p < .01, and the nation of origin by rule category interaction, F (2, 400) = 16.13, p < .001, were still statistically significant. However, the main effect of nation of origin dropped to become only marginally significant, F (1, 200) = 3.13, p = .078. Neither the acculturation main effect, F (1, 200) = 0.64, p = .427, nor the acculturation by rule category interaction, F (2, 400) = 1.66, p = .191, were statistically significant. These findings partially respond to RQ4, and suggest that acculturation to U.S. culture does not explain the effect of nation of origin on seriousness ratings.

Acculturation to the U.S. and Researchers’ Prediction Accuracy

Lastly, we examined whether acculturation explained the effects of nation of origin on prediction accuracy. In contrast to the analyses of seriousness ratings, adding acculturation to the analyses of researchers’ prediction accuracy scores changed the effects of nation of origin on prediction accuracy. In the analysis with the research regulations, scientific norms, and professional ideals, when acculturation was added to the model, there was no longer a significant main effect of nation of origin, F (1, 200) = 2.35, p = .127, main effect of rule category, F (2, 400) = 0.06, p = .944, or an interaction between nation of origin and rule category, F (2, 400) = 2.43, p = .089. However, there was also not a significant main effect of acculturation, F (1, 200) = 2.13, p = .146, or interaction of acculturation and rule category, F (2, 400) = 0.70, p = .499. Thus, acculturation explained some of the variation in prediction accuracy that nation of origin and rule category had explained initially.

In contrast, the analysis with the narrower research misconduct regulations, scientific norms, and professional ideals revealed that acculturation was a significant predictor of accuracy, and adding acculturation to the model removed the main effects of nation of origin, F (1, 200) = 1.67, p = .198, and rule category, F (2, 400) = 1.98, p = .140. The interaction between nation of origin and rule category was also not significant, F (2, 400) = 1.44, p = .239. However, now there was a significant main effect of acculturation, F (1, 200) = 4.87, p < .05, as well as an interaction between acculturation and rule category, F (2, 400) = 3.79, p < .05. Thus, more acculturated individuals were more generally accurate in their predictions. Follow-up regression analyses to examine the specific nature of the interaction effect revealed that acculturation did not predict accuracy for norms ( β = .06, t (201) = 0.80, p = .422), but that greater acculturation was associated with more accuracy for research misconduct regulations in particular ( β = .25, t (201) = 3.65, p < .001) and professional ideals to some degree ( β = .12, t (201) = 1.78, p = .077). Overall, to complete the response to RQ4, these findings suggest that acculturation partially explains the differences between U.S. born and non-U.S. born researchers’ levels of accuracy, particularly when focusing on research misconduct regulations.

The present study examined differences among researchers by nation of origin—those born in the U.S. versus those born primarily in Asia—in their evaluations of the seriousness of violations of different categories of rules in research and accuracy in predicting the views of RIOs. We found that nationality influenced researchers’ perceptions of rules in the U.S. research context. Researchers working in the U.S. who were born internationally perceived less distinction between the seriousness of violating different categories of rules than researchers born in the U.S. Their lower discrimination scores relative to U.S.-born researchers stemmed from evaluating violations of research misconduct rules as less serious and professional ideals as more serious than U.S. researchers. The difference between U.S. and non-U.S.-researchers’ evaluations of professional ideals was particularly pronounced. Perhaps the social nature of the professional ideals accounted for Asian researchers evaluating violations of these items as fairly serious, as Asian cultures emphasize interdependence and the needs of the group over the individual ( Triandis 2001 ).

Nonetheless, recognizing the relative distinctions between the categories of rules may reflect deeper awareness of how these rules are viewed and applied in the U.S. research context, particularly in terms of their consequences if violated. This awareness may be important for one’s interactions, choices, and behaviors within the research setting. It is important to note that we presume that the reverse is also likely true: a U.S. researcher working internationally may not recognize as readily as locals how rules in research are interpreted and applied in that setting.

We also examined researchers’ predictions of the evaluations of the rules that they anticipated RIOs working in the U.S. would make. In this task, researchers considered not their personal evaluations of the rules, but how they thought that research officials evaluate the rules. We found that international researchers were less accurate in their predictions of U.S. RIOs’ ratings of the seriousness of violating different rules, except for predicting norms where there was no difference. Navigating professional life requires applying rules in one’s work practices. Even if individuals know the content of the rules, an aspect of professional acumen requires understanding the seriousness attributed to the rules in one’s specific professional context. Our findings suggest that this latter task is a more culturally sophisticated one. Without this understanding, an individual may be at greater risk of getting into trouble when working outside of their home country. It is of note that we observed these differences in perceptions despite the fact that most of the researchers born outside of the U.S. completed their scientific training in the U.S. This finding likely reflects the strong influence of culture and its relative persistence even with exposure to a host culture.

To obtain evidence regarding the potential for changes in perceptions as individuals acculturate to a host culture, we assessed acculturation and examined whether it accounted for the relationships observed between nation of origin, discrimination, and accuracy. Acculturation did not exert the same influence on individuals’ ratings of their personal views of the seriousness of violating different sets of rules as it did on their accuracy in predicting how a compliance officer would view violations of the rules. This may reflect the persistence of cultural influences on personal views and judgments even with experience in a new culture, but the ability to adapt one’s understanding of how others in a culture might view matters. It is of note that acculturation research suggests that adapting well to a host culture involves orienting oneself to the new culture, while retaining some connection to one’s home cultural identity ( Sam and Berry 2010 ). Thus, adapting to rules as interpreted and applied in a particular nation does not preclude individuals from maintaining ties to their home culture.

While our findings with regard to acculturation suggest that experience in a culture may play some role in researchers’ perceptions of rules, we found that experience in research was less important than experience in the culture. It is not clear precisely why experience in research was limited in its influence on perceptions of rules, and in particular, why more experience was associated with lower accuracy and being a trainee with greater discrimination and accuracy. However, these findings were not entirely surprising given prior research on the influence of experience in research on other related outcomes; generally, experience was not associated with researchers’ scores on measures of ethical decision-making ( Mumford et al. 2009a ) or professional decision-making ( Antes et al. 2016 ; DuBois et al. 2016b ). Other work examining researchers’ subscription to norms and counternorms in science found that early-career and mid-career scientists generally subscribed to the norms of science equally, but differed in their subscription to counternorms, with mid-career researchers subscribing to most counternorms to a greater extent than early-career researchers ( Anderson et al. 2007 ). Thus, it is generally unclear whether research experience may have a deleterious, beneficial, or neutral influence on researchers’ perceptions of rules in science.

We also observed no relationship between hours of ethics instruction and perceptions of rules. This too was not surprising, as we have previously found no effects of self-reported hours of research ethics instruction on professional decision making ( Antes et al. 2016 ). Overall, the effect of research ethics instruction on various outcomes is notoriously mixed and tends to be moderate at best ( Antes et al. 2009 ; Antes et al. 2010 ; Kalichman 2014b ; Watts et al. 2016 ).

Implications for Education in the Responsible Conduct of Research (RCR)

Many rules and norms are recommended content for mandated training in RCR in the U.S. ( Kalichman and Plemmons 2007 ; Kalichman 2014b ; Steneck 2007 ). Our findings underscore the need for instructors to consider how they present the diverse rules and norms in science and make clear the distinctions between them. This is important generally for newcomers to research, but particularly for international researchers. Researchers, especially senior researchers, may unwittingly take for granted the sources of rules in science, and their interpretations, applications, and consequences. However, RCR education would best serve researchers if it were explicit about both the content and the consequences of rules. For example, it is arguably important for researchers to know that in the U.S. we punish more severely plagiarism (e.g., through debarment from funding, public shaming on government websites, and possible termination of employment) than violations of authorship criteria. In a study of instructors’ goals for teaching knowledge in RCR courses, some instructors reported not covering research misconduct in their courses because they viewed these serious violations as a limited problem or covering misconduct as not the intention of RCR education ( Plemmons and Kalichman 2007 ). Yet, such instructional omission may disproportionately disadvantage international researchers.

Heitman (2014) specifically noted the potential value of exploring research policy and regulatory frameworks for science in different countries as an activity in cross-cultural research ethics training. A framework for RCR education that helps researchers identify their own and others’ orientations and assumptions might be particularly essential given this diversity and complexity ( DuBois et al. 2016b ; Mumford et al. 2008 ). Cultural generalizations about a particular cultural group are useful to understand common tendencies and patterns of behavior or beliefs within that group, but they are only useful when an individual gathers further information about a specific individual and listens and interacts with that individual with empathetic awareness ( Galanti 2000 ).

Finally, mentors should not assume that everyone shares the same perspective; rather they should hold explicit conversations about research integrity and practices ( Loue and Loff 2013 ). Trainees should also be empowered to start conversations about rules, standards, and practices ( Kalichman 2014a ). Many of our recommendations will require cross-cultural competence and sensitivity on the part of instructors, mentors, and trainees.

Limitations and Future Research

Our study employed a criterion-based sample of U.S.-born and non-U.S.-born, NIH-funded researchers across career stages (post-doctoral trainees, junior faculty, and mid to senior investigators). We recruited intentionally to ensure roughly equal representation across these groups, and we stopped collecting data once we reached targeted enrollment. This study was time-consuming for participants (requiring approximately 45 – 60 minutes), which makes it challenging to obtain high participation rates on a voluntary basis. Although our sample size was large enough to detect statistically significant differences between our groups, our ability to generalize is limited. We therefore recommend a replication study.

Although we identified differences by nationality in perceptions of rules, we do not know how these differences influence real-world behavior. It is reasonable to expect that interpretations of the rules influence the application of those rules in one’s work, but we did not establish that link in the present effort. We encourage further research that focuses on behavioral outcomes, even while acknowledging that obtaining such data is extremely difficult for reasons of ethics and practicality.

It is unclear from the present effort how researchers think about the “seriousness” of a violation. For example, is a violation serious insofar as it is likely to be caught or punished, if it is likely to damage the scientific record, or if it damages relationships in the scientific work setting? It is unclear how culture might inform these judgments, but we know that different cultures have different bases for rules and view different behaviors as appropriate and inappropriate ( Hooker 2009 ). We would recommend a qualitative approach to explore nuanced thinking about the content and importance of diverse rules and norms in research. For example, in such work individuals might be asked to elucidate their thought processes in evaluating the seriousness of rules; this might reveal why Asian researchers evaluated violations of ideals as more serious relative to U.S. researchers.

We also do not know from the present study specifically what explains the differences in perceptions of rules that we identified by nationality, and it is critical in cultural research to discover the mechanisms underlying observed differences (Wang, 2016). The following important research questions remain unanswered:

• Are differences linked to different levels of observed adherence to the rules among colleagues and mentors ( Mumford et al. 2009b )?
• Are differences due simply to the prevalence of different norms for the conduct of research ( Boesz and Lloyd 2008 ; Chaurasia 2016 ; Steneck 2013 )
• Are differences due to different reward structures for scientific behaviors ( DePellegrin and Johnston 2015 ; Jufang and Huiyun 2011 )?
• To what extent does the local institutional or lab ethical climate influence judgments about rules in science ( Fisher et al. 2009b ; Mumford et al. 2007 ; Wells et al. 2014 ; Martinson et al. 2016 ), and how does this interact with nation of origin?
• Do researchers and trainees from the same nation gravitate together in labs when working abroad, thus reinforcing the values of the nation of origin?
• Are there international differences in how rules are enforced and violations punished or remediated?
• What is the influence of different professional and cultural values on learning the values of research ( Nho 2016 )?

In this study, we operationalized culture using nation of origin, and split our sample into two groups—those from the U.S. and those from outside of the U.S. The group not born in the U.S. primarily consisted of Asian researchers. Our current data do not allow us to distinguish differences that might exist among specific groups of researchers from other international backgrounds. Furthermore, grouping researchers from all Asian nations together allowed a general comparison of those from Eastern and Western cultures, but not an examination of potentially important differences within different Asian cultures. Indeed, the non-U.S.-born group of researchers tended to have greater variance in their average responses than U.S.-born researchers. Further research should explicitly examine different Asian cultures, and, additionally, might employ alternatives to nation of birth for operationalizing culture, for example, values. Although nationality is a common proxy variable for culture, other measures may permit more specific understanding of the mechanisms underlying the influence of culture. Future research should also be sensitive to individual differences, and to the fact that individuals who emigrate to pursue their career may differ from the average individual within their home culture.

We also encourage future research to consider alternative approaches to measuring perceptions of rules and related outcome measures to expand this work. The difference scores approach applied in this study yielded attenuated reliabilities, and, therefore, produced conservative findings. Additionally, we employed measures written in English. We consider this appropriate in this sample and given the participants’ task. The language of research compliance and research integrity in the U.S. is English, thus it is appropriate to ask researchers to make these practical, professional judgments in this local language. Additionally, the ERST measure was written at approximately the 6-grade reading level and the items were evaluated for clarity with cognitive interviews among Asian researchers before initiating the study. Also of note, nearly all the individuals in our sample trained in the U.S. and held NIH funding as principal investigators; thus their English proficiency would likely differ substantially relative to international researchers just joining research labs in the U.S. Nevertheless, it is important to note in cross-cultural research the importance of measures that are equally valid in both groups to ensure meaningful comparisons ( Milfont, 2015 ).

A related consideration comes from recent work suggesting that moral judgments differ by native versus second language. However, this work focused on basic moral reasoning scenarios (e.g., the trolley dilemma; consensual incest) ( Costa et al. 2014 ; Geipel et al. 2015 ; Geipel et al. 2016 ) as opposed to applied, work-place scenarios where individuals may have learned the topics in their second language, and are exposed to the issues in their second language. Nonetheless, it is appropriate to consider how the language of measures within a given cross-cultural study might influence findings.

Finally, our study focused on U.S. norms and used the views of U.S. RIOs to generate a target for accuracy predictions. We assume that similar differences would be observed if our study design were reversed and U.S.-born researchers working, say, in China, were asked about rules and the seriousness of violating rules within Chinese research settings. We intended to focus on fundamental mechanisms such as nationality and acculturation; however, it is necessary to adopt the perspective of specific cultures when studying such matters. Future research should be conducted in diverse home nations.

Our findings suggest that the scientific community should not take for granted that all researchers understand in the same way the different categories of rules that govern scientific work in the U.S. We know that diverse perspectives in the workplace foster creative problem solving and innovation when leveraged effectively, but multicultural collaborations do involve challenges ( Chua 2013 ; Dibble and Gibson 2013 ; Hwang 2013 ). Thus, to support high-quality, responsible research in today’s globalized scientific setting ( InterAcademy Parternership 2016 ), we must better understand the role of culture and adapt our approaches to training, mentoring, and collaborating to best serve all researchers and society.

Appendix. Items from the Evaluating Rules in Science Task

Research regulations and statutes.

• 1 Disclose all financial conflicts of interest in research.
• 2 Give credit when using the words of other people.
• 3 Complete federally mandated training programs.
• 4 Only report findings that accurately reflect research data.
• 5 Share data when required by funding agencies.
• 6 Ensure salary charged to grants reflects actual time spent on the project.

Norms of Science

• 7 Read and approve the final text of articles when listed as an author.
• 8 Completely describe your analysis approach in research publications.
• 9 Be objective when reviewing the work of peers.
• 10 Discuss limitations of studies when publishing results.
• 11 Report initial hypotheses or research questions regardless of study results.
• 12 Ensure all electronic data are backed up to protect them from loss.

Professional Ideals

• 13 Be available to colleagues who need assistance.
• 14 Volunteer to serve on committees of professional associations.
• 15 Work hard to produce publications in high quality journals.
• 16 Build relationships with the people working in compliance offices.
• 17 Attend events aimed at building a community of scholars.
• 18 Share study findings with the public.

Authors Note

The authors have no conflicts of interest to disclose. We would like to thank Mobolaji Fowose for assistance with the literature search.

Contributor Information

Alison L. Antes, Division of General Medical Sciences, Washington University School of Medicine, 4523 Clayton Avenue, Campus Box 8005, St. Louis, MO 63110, USA, 314-362-6006 (p), 314-454-5113 (f)

Tammy English, Department of Psychological & Brain Sciences, Washington University in St. Louis, One Brookings Drive, Campus Box 1125, St. Louis, MO 63130, USA, 314-935-3190 (p)

Kari A. Baldwin, Division of General Medical Sciences, Washington University School of Medicine, 4523 Clayton Avenue, Campus Box 8005, St. Louis, MO 63110, USA, 314-747-2703 (p), 314-454-5113 (f)

James M. DuBois, Division of General Medical Sciences, Washington University School of Medicine, 4523 Clayton Avenue, Campus Box 8005, St. Louis, MO 63110, USA, 314-747-2710 (p), 314-454-5113 (f)

• Adams LG. Putting together a scientific team: Collaborative science. Trends in Microbiology. 2014; 22 (9):483–485. doi: 10.1016/j.tim.2014.05.001. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Anderson MS, Adam JA. A proposal for considering research integrity from the perspective of behavioral economics. Journal of Microbiology & Biology Education. 2014; 15 (2):173–176. doi: 10.1128/jmbe.v15i2.868. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Anderson MS, Louis KS. The graduate student experience and subscription to the norms of science. Research in Higher Education. 1994; 35 (3):273–299. doi: 10.1007/BF02496825. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Anderson MS, Martinson BC, De Vries R. Normative dissonance in science: Results from a national survey of U.S. scientists. Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics. 2007; 2 (4):3–14. doi: 10.1525/jer.2007.2.4.3. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Anderson MS, Ronning EA, De Vries R, Martinson B. Extending the Mertonian norms: Scientists’ subscription to norms of research. Journal of Higher Education. 2010; 81 (3):366–393. doi: 10.1353/jhe.0.0095. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Antes AL, Chibnall JT, Baldwin KA, Tait RC, Vander Wal JS, DuBois JM. Making professional decisions in research: Measurement and key predictors. Accountability in Research. 2016; 23 (5):288–308. doi: 10.1080/08989621.2016.1171149. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Antes AL, Murphy ST, Waples EP, Mumford MD, Brown RP, Connelly S, et al. A meta-analysis of ethics instruction effectiveness in the sciences. Ethics and Behavior. 2009; 19 (5):379–402. doi: 10.1080/10508420903035380. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Antes AL, Wang X, Mumford MD, Brown R, Connelly S, Devenport LD. Evaluating the effects that existing instruction on responsible conduct of research has on ethical decision making. Academic Medicine. 2010; 85 (3):519–526. doi: 10.1097/ACM.0b013e3181cd1cc5. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Aycan Z, Gelfand MJ. Cross-cultural organizational psychology. In: Kozlowski SWJ, editor. The Oxford handbook of organizational psychology. Vol. 2. New York: Oxford University Press; 2012. pp. 1103–1160. [ Google Scholar ]
• Ayman R, Korabik K. Leadership: Why gender and culture matter. American Psychologist. 2010; 65 (3):157–170. doi: 10.1037/a0018806. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Beatty PC, Willis G. Research synthesis: The practice of cognitive interviewing. Public Opinion Quarterly. 2007; 71 (2):287–311. doi: 10.1093/poq/nfm006. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Benatar SR. A new look at international research ethics. British Medical Journal. 2000; 321 (7264):824–826. doi: 10.1136/bmj.321.7264.824. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Birman D, Simon CD. Acculturation research: Challenges, complexities, and possibilities. In: Leong FTL, Comas-Díaz L, Nagayama Hall GC, McLoyd VC, Trimble JE, Leong FTL, editors. APA handbook of multicultural psychology, Vol. 1: Theory and research. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association; 2014. pp. 207–230. [ Google Scholar ]
• Boesz C, Lloyd N. Collaborations: Investigating international misconduct. Nature. 2008; 452 (7188):686–687. doi: 10.1038/452686a. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Calamaro CJ. Culture competence in research: Research design and subject recruitment. Journal of Pediatric Health Care. 2008; 22 (5):329–332. doi: 10.1016/j.pedhc.2008.05.007. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Center for Postsecondary Research. Carnegie classification of insitutions of higher education. Center for Postsecondary Reseearch. Indiana University School of Education; 2016. Retrieved from http://carnegieclassifications.iu.edu/ [ Google Scholar ]
• Chaurasia A. Stop teaching Indians to copy and paste. Nature. 2016; 534 :1. doi: 10.1038/534591a. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Chua RYJ. The costs of ambient cultural disharmony: Indirect intercultural conflicts in social environment undermine creativity. Academy of Management Journal. 2013; 56 (6):1545–1577. doi: 10.5465/amj.2011.0971. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Costa A, Foucart A, Hayakawa S, Aparici M, Apesteguia J, Heafner J, et al. Your morals depend on language. PLOS One. 2014; 9 (4):e94842. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0094842. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Davis MS. The role of culture in research misconduct. Accountability in Research. 2003; 10 :189–201. doi: 10.1080/08989620390250207. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• De Vries R, Anderson MS, Martinson BC. Normal misbehavior: Scientists talk about the ethics of research. Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics. 2006; 1 (1):43–50. doi: 10.1525/jer.2006.1.1.43. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• DePellegrin TA, Johnston M. An arbitrary line in the sand: Rising scientists confront the impact factor. Genetics. 2015; 201 (3):811–813. doi: 10.1534/genetics.115.182261. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Dibble R, Gibson C. Collaboration for the common good: An examination of challenges and adjustment processes in multicultural collaborations. Journal of Organizational Behavior. 2013; 34 (6):764–790. doi: 10.1002/job.1872. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Dickson MW, Den Hartog DN, Mitchelson JK. Research on leadership in a cross-cultural context: Making progress, and raising new questions. Leadership Quarterly. 2003; 14 :729–768. doi: 10.1016/j.lequa.2003.09.002. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• DuBois JM. Is compliance a professional virtue of researchers? Reflections on promoting the responsible conduct of research. Ethics and Behavior. 2004; 14 (4):383–395. doi: 10.1207/s15327019eb1404_8. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• DuBois JM, Chibnall JT, Tait RC, Vander Wal JS. Lessons from researcher rehab. Nature. 2016a; 534 :173–175. doi: 10.1038/534173a. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• DuBois JM, Chibnall JT, Tait RC, Vander Wal JS, Baldwin KA, Antes AL, et al. Professional Decision-Making in Research (PDR): The validity of a new measure. Science and Engineering Ethics. 2016b; 22 (2):391–416. doi: 10.1007/s11948-015-9667-8. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• DuBois JM, Schilling D, Heitman E, Steneck NH, Kon A. Instruction in the responsible conduct of research: An inventory of programs and materials within CTSAs. Clinical and Translational Science. 2010; 3 (3):109–111. doi: 10.1111/j.1752-8062.2010.00193.x. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Fisher CB, Fried AL, Feldman LG. Graduate socialization in the responsible conduct of research: A national survey on the research ethics training experiences of psychology doctoral students. Ethics and Behavior. 2009a; 19 (6):496–518. doi: 10.1080/10508420903275283. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Fisher CB, Fried AL, Goodman SJ, Germano KK. Measures of mentoring, department climate, and graduate student preparedness in the responsible conduct of psychological research. Ethics and Behavior. 2009b; 19 (3):227–252. doi: 10.1080/10508420902886726. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Galanti G. An introduction to cultural differences. Western Journal of Medicine. 2000; 172 (5):335–336. doi: 10.1136/ewjm.172.5.33. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Garrison HH, Stith AL, Gerbi SA. Foreign post-docs: The changing face of biomedical science in the US. FASEB Journal. 2005; 19 (14):1938–1942. doi: 10.1096/fj.05-1203ufm. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Geipel J, Hadjichristidis C, Surian L. How foreign language shapes moral judgment. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology. 2015; 59 :8–17. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2015.02.001 . [ Google Scholar ]
• Geipel J, Hadjichristidis C, Surian L. Foreign language affects the contribution of intentions and outcomes to moral judgment. Cognition. 2016; 154 :34–39. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2016.05.010 . [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Gelfand MJ, Brett J, Gunia BC, Imai L, Huang TJ, Hsu BF. Toward a culture-by-context perspective on negotiation: Negotiating teams in the United States and Taiwan. Journal of Applied Psychology. 2013; 98 (3):504–513. doi: 10.1037/a0031908. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Heine SJ, Ruby MB. Cultural psychology. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews-Cognitive Science. 2010; 1 (2):254–266. doi: 10.1002/wcs.7. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Heitman E. Cross-cultural considerations in U.S. research ethics education. Journal of Microbiology & Biology Education. 2014; 15 (2):130–134. doi: 10.1128/jmbe.v15i2.860. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Heitman E, Litewka S. International perspectives on plagiarism and considerations for teaching international trainees. Urologic Oncology. 2011; 29 (1):104–108. doi: 10.1016/j.urolonc.2010.09.014. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Hooker J. Corruption from a cross-cultural perspective. Cross Cultural Management. 2009; 16 (3):251–267. doi: 10.1108/13527600910977346. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Burroughs Wellcome Fund, Howard Hughes Medical Institute. Making the right moves: A practical guide to scientific management for post-docs and new faculty. 2. Research Park Triangle, NC: Burroughs Wellcome Fund; Chevy Chase, MD: Howard Hughes Medical Institute; 2006. [ Google Scholar ]
• Hwang K. Effects of the language barrier on processes and performance of international scientific collaboration, collaborators’ participation, organizational integrity, and interorganizational relationships. Science Communication. 2013; 35 (1):3–31. doi: 10.1177/1075547012437442. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• InterAcademy Parternership. Doing global science: A guide to responsible conduct in the global research enterprise. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press; 2016. [ Google Scholar ]
• John LK, Loewenstein G, Prelec D. Measuring the prevalence of questionable research practices with incentives for truth telling. Psychological Science. 2012; 23 (5):524–532. doi: 10.1177/0956797611430953. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Jufang S, Huiyun S. The outflow of academic papers from China: Why is it happening and can it be stemmed? Learned Publishing. 2011; 24 (2):95–97. doi: 10.1087/20110203. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Kalichman MW. A modest proposal to move RCR education out of the classroom and into research. Journal of Microbiology & Biology Education. 2014a; 15 (2):93–95. doi: 10.1128/jmbe.v15i2.866. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Kalichman MW. Rescuing Responsible Conduct of Research (RCR) education. Accountability in Research. 2014b; 21 (1):68–83. doi: 10.1080/08989621.2013.822271. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Kalichman MW, Plemmons DK. Reported goals for responsible conduct of research courses. Academic Medicine. 2007; 82 (9):846–852. doi: 10.1097/ACM.0b013e31812f78bf. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Kent MM. More U.S. scientists and engineers are foreign-born. Population Reference Bureau. 2011 Retrieved from http://www.prb.org/Publications/Articles/2011/usforeignbornstem.aspx .
• Knafo A, Roccas S, Sagiv L. The value of values in cross-cultural research: A special issue in honor of Shalom Schwartz. Journal of Cross-cultural Psychology. 2011; 42 (2):178–185. doi: 10.1177/0022022110396863. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Kon AA, Schilling DA, Heitman E, Steneck NH, DuBois JM. Content analysis of major textbooks and online resources used in responsible conduct of research instruction. AJOB Primary Research. 2011; 2 (1):42–46. doi: 10.1080/21507716.2011.564263. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Korenman SG, Berk R, Wenger NS, Lew V. Evaluation of the research norms of scientists and administrators responsible for academic research integrity. Journal of the American Medical Association. 1998; 279 (1):41–47. doi: 10.1001/jama.279.1.41. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Kreutzberg GW. The rules of good science. EMBO Reports. 2004; 5 (4):330–332. doi: 10.1038/sj.embor.7400136. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Loue S, Loff B. Mentoring international research ethics trainees: Identifying best practices. Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics. 2013; 8 (5):52–58. doi: 10.1525/jer.2013.8.5.52. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Lu Y, Samaratunge R, Härtel CEJ. Predictors of acculturation attitudes among professional Chinese immigrants in the Australian workplace. Journal of Management & Organization. 2016; 22 (1):49–67. doi: 10.1017/jmo.2015.19. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Macrina FL. Scientific societies and promotion of the responsible conduct of research: Codes, policies, and education. Academic Medicine. 2007; 82 (9):865–869. doi: 10.1097/ACM.0b013e31812f7e58. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Macrina FL. Scientific Integrity: Text and cases in responsible conduct of research. 4. Washington, D.C: ASM Press; 2014. [ Google Scholar ]
• Markus HR, Kitayama S. Culture and the self: Implications for cognition, emotion, and motivation. Psychological Review. 1991; 98 (2):224. [ Google Scholar ]
• Marshall PA. “Cultural competence” and informed consent in international health research. Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics. 2008; 17 (2):206–215. doi: 10.1017/S0963180108080237. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Martinson BC, Anderson MS, de Vries R. Scientists behaving badly. Nature. 2005; 435 (7043):737–738. doi: 10.1038/435737a. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Martinson BC, Crain AL, Anderson MS, De Vries R. Institutions’ expectations for researchers’ self-funding, federal grant holding, and private industry involvement: Manifold drivers of self-interest and researcher behavior. Academic Medicine. 2009; 84 :1491–1499. doi: 10.1097/ACM.0b013e3181bb2ca6. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Martinson BC, Nelson D, Hagel-Campbell E, Mohr D, Charns MP, Bangerter A, et al. Initial results from the Survey of Organizational Research Climates (SOuRCe) in the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs Healthcare System. PLOS One. 2016; 11 (3):e0151571. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0151571. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Mendenhall M, Oddou G. The dimensions of expatriate acculturation: A review. The Academy of Management Review. 1985; 10 (1):39–47. doi: 10.2307/258210. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Milfont TL, Fischer R. Testing measurement invariance across groups: Applications in cross-cultural research. International Journal of Psychological Research. 2015; 3 (1):111–130. [ Google Scholar ]
• MetaMetrics. Lexile-to-Grade Correspondence. 2016 Retrieved from https://www.lexile.com/about-lexile/grade-equivalent/grade-equivalent-chart/
• Mumford MD, Connelly S, Brown RP, Murphy ST, Hill JH, Antes AL, et al. A sensemaking approach to ethics training for scientists: preliminary evidence of training effectiveness. Ethics and Behavior. 2008; 18 (4):315–339. doi: 10.1080/10508420802487815. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Mumford MD, Connelly S, Murphy ST, Devenport LD, Antes AL, Brown RP, et al. Field and experience influences on ethical decision making in the sciences. Ethics and Behavior. 2009a; 19 (4):263–289. doi: 10.1080/10508420903035257. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Mumford MD, Murphy ST, Connelly S, Hill JH, Antes AL, Brown RP, et al. Environmental influences on ethical decision making: Climate and environmental predictors of research integrity. Ethics and Behavior. 2007; 17 (4):337–366. doi: 10.1080/10508420701519510. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Mumford MD, Waples EP, Antes AL, Murphy ST, Connelly S, Brown RP, et al. Exposure to unethical career events: Effects on decision-making, climate, and socialization. Ethics and Behavior. 2009b; 19 (5):351–378. doi: 10.1080/10508420903035356. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• National Academies of Science. On being a scientist. Washington, DC: National Academics Press; 2009. [ Google Scholar ]
• National Institues of Health RePORT. Data on post-docs by citizenship. ACD biomedical workforce workding group data. 2012 Retrieved from http://report.nih.gov/investigators_and_trainees/ACD_BWF/data_post-docs_citizenship.aspx .
• National Science Foundation. Chapter 5: Academic research and development. Science and engineering indicators 2014. 2014 http://www.nsf.gov/statistics/seind14/index.cfm/chapter-5/c5h.htm#s4 .
• Nho H. Research ethics education in Korea for overcoming culture and value system differences. Journal of Open Innovation: Technology, Market, and Complexity. 2016; 2 (1):1–11. doi: 10.1186/s40852-016-0030-3. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Nisbett RE, Miyamoto Y. The influence of culture: Holistic versus analytic perception. Trends in Cognitive Sciences. 2005; 9 (10):467–473. doi: 10.1016/j.tics.2005.08.004. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Office of Management and Budget. Revisions to the standards for the classification of federal data on race and ethnicity. Federal Register Notice. 1997 Oct 20; Retrieved from https://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/fedreg_1997standards .
• Oyserman D, Coon HM, Kemmelmeier M. Rethinking individualism and collectivism: Evaluation of theoretical assumptions and meta-analyses. Psychological Bulletin. 2002; 128 (1):3–72. doi: 10.1037//0033-2909.128.1.3. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Peng K, Nisbett RE. Culture, dialectics, and reasoning about contradiction. American Psychologist. 1999; 54 (9):741–754. doi: 10.1037/0003-066X.54.9.741. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Pimple KD. Six domains of research ethics a heuristic framework for the responsible conduct of research. Science and Engineering Ethics. 2002; 8 (2):191–205. doi: 10.1007/s11948-002-0018-1. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Pitta DA, Fung HG, Isberg S. Ethical issues across cultures: Managing the differing perspectives of China and the USA. Journal of Consumer Marketing. 1999; 16 (3):240–256. doi: 10.1108/07363769910271487. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Plemmons DK, Kalichman MW. Reported goals for knowledge to be learned in responsible conduct of research courses. Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics. 2007; 2 (2):57–66. doi: 10.1525/jer.2007.2.2.57. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Ralston DA, Holt DH, Terpstra RH, Kai-Cheng Y. The impact of national culture and economic ideology on managerial work values: A study of the United States, Russia, Japan, and China. Journal of International Business Studies. 1997; 28 (1):177–207. doi: 10.1057/palgrave.jibs.8400330. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Ramesh A, Gelfand MJ. Will they stay or will they go? The role of job embeddedness in predicting turnover in individualistic and collectivistic cultures. Journal of Applied Psychology. 2010; 95 (5):807–823. doi: 10.1037/a0019464. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Resick C, Martin G, Keating M, Dickson M, Kwan H, Peng C. What ethical leadership means to me: Asian, American, and European perspectives. Journal of Business Ethics. 2011; 101 (3):435–457. doi: 10.1007/s10551-010-0730-8. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Sachdeva S, Singh P, Medin D. Culture and the quest for universal principles in moral reasoning. International Journal of Psychology. 2011; 46 (3):161–176. doi: 10.1080/00207594.2011.568486. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Sam DL, Berry JW. Acculturation: When individuals and groups of different cultural backgrounds meet. Perspectives on Psychological Science. 2010; 5 (4):472–481. doi: 10.1177/1745691610373075. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Shah BR, Chiu M, Amin S, Ramani M, Sadry S, Tu JV. Surname lists to identify South Asian and Chinese ethnicity from secondary data in Ontario, Canada: A validation study. BMC Medical Research Methodology. 2010; 10 :42. doi: 10.1186/1471-2288-10-42. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Shamoo AE, Resnik DB. Responsible conduct of research. 3. New York: Oxford University Press; 2015. [ Google Scholar ]
• Soares AM, Farhangmehr M, Shoham A. Hofstede’s dimensions of culture in international marketing studies. Journal of Business Research. 2007; 60 (3):277–284. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2006.10.018 . [ Google Scholar ]
• Steele LM, Johnson JF, Watts LL, MacDougall AE, Mumford MD, Connelly S, Williams THL. A comparison of the effects of ethics training on international and U.S. students. Science and Engineering Ethics. 2016; 22 (4):1217–1244. doi: 10.1007/s11948-015-9678-5. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Steneck NH. Fostering integrity in research: Definitions, current knowledge, and future directions. Science and Engineering Ethics. 2006; 12 (1):53–74. doi: 10.1007/PL00022268. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Steneck NH. ORI introduction to the responsible conduct of research. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office; 2007. [ Google Scholar ]
• Steneck NH. Global research integrity training. Science. 2013; 340 (6132):552–553. doi: 10.1126/science.1236373. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Taras V, Kirkman BL, Steel P. Examining the impact of culture’s consequences: A three-decade, multilevel, meta-analytic review of Hofstede’s cultural value dimensions. Journal of Applied Psychology. 2010; 95 (3):405–439. doi: 10.1037/a0018938. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Taras V, Rowney J, Steel P. Work-related acculturation: Change in individual work-related cultural values following immigration. The International Journal of Human Resource Management. 2013; 24 (1):130–151. doi: 10.1080/09585192.2012.672446. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Taylor SE, Sherman DK, Kim HS, Jarcho J, Takagi K, Dunagan MS. Culture and social support: Who seeks it and why? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 2004; 87 (3):354. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.87.3.354. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Triandis HC. Individualism and collectivism. Boulder, CO: Westview Press; 1995. [ Google Scholar ]
• Triandis HC. Individualism-collectivism and personality. Journal of Personality. 2001; 69 (6):907–924. doi: 10.1111/1467-6494.696169. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Tsai JL, Ying Y, Lee PA. The meaning of “being Chinese” and “being American”: Variation among Chinese American young adults. Journal of Cross-cultural Psychology. 2000; 31 (3):302–332. doi: 10.1177/0022022100031003002. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Watts LL, Medeiros KE, Mulhearn TJ, Steele LM, Connelly S, Mumford MD. Are ethics training programs improving? A meta-analytic review of past and present ethics instruction in the sciences. Ethics and Behavior. 2016 doi: 10.1080/10508422.2016.1182025. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Wells JA, Thrush CR, Martinson BC, May TA, Stickler M, Callahan EC, et al. Survey of organizational research climates in three research intensive, doctoral granting universities. Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics. 2014; 9 (5):72–88. doi: 10.1177/1556264614552798. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Wong EC, Palaniappan LP, Lauderdale DS. Using name lists to infer Asian racial/ethnic subgroups in the healthcare setting. Medical Care. 2010; 48 (6):540–546. doi: 10.1097/MLR.0b013e3181d559e9. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]

You are using an outdated browser. Please upgrade your browser to improve your experience.

The Good Science Project

• Research Culture

A rough guide to ‘research culture’

Stephen Webster

2 September 2024

No doubt about it, anyone trying to understand the concept ‘research culture’, in particular its problems and its routes to improvement, has their work cut out. In considering research culture, are we likely to find ourselves discussing ethics, or management technique, or HR policy, or diversity and inclusion, or something else entirely? As the Good Science Project moves into its third year I anticipate spending time trying to put order into this unruly list. I remember, at our very first meeting, I discussed the god Perseus, and his way of dealing with the Gorgon by refusing to look directly at those terrifying locks. Instead, by holding up a mirror, he could deal with his problem satisfactorily. Is there a sense in which ‘research culture’ cannot be looked at directly, that like Perseus we must hold up a mirror? This was certainly my thinking in setting up the Triptych of Science art project, where scientists made art works to express their views on their working life.

It always helps discipline the mind when an invitation to give a talk comes your way, and so I was grateful to the United Kingdom Research Integrity Office when it asked me to give a seminar, alongside my ex-student Mun Keat Looi, on the relation between research culture and science communication. I decided to take the opportunity to do some ‘organising’, both of how I see the history of the field, and how I think ‘ethics’ might have a role in issues of research culture. Thus, towards the end of my talk, I began to discuss how virtue ethics – that is, the branch of ethics that considers matters of character and stems from classical Greece – might be for us a key support in our search both for understanding, and for action. My next blog, in fact, will be a detailed look at how ethics, and what aspects of ethics, might illuminate our thoughts about research culture.

I reproduce below the briefing notes I provided to UKRIO and the participants of the webinar.

Hand-out notes for UKRIO webinar talk by Dr Stephen Webster, Imperial College London. 26th June: ‘Science Communication and Science Integrity’. Introduction Science communication is generally considered to be the facilitation of science-society relations, through a number of formats: science journalism, university outreach and communication, policy initiatives and social science research. However, a very important aspect of science communication concerns the issue of how, within a research institution, scientists communicate with each other. Therefore, in today’s webinar, if Mun Keat Looi considers integrity and science journalism as a key external communication issue, I will look at something more internal: integrity and daily laboratory life. While Mun Keat looks at how science journalists manage the various and often conflicting demands of their profession, so I will look at the way research integrity is sometimes vulnerable to the conflicting demands of the life scientific. A Brief History of Science Integrity The United Kingdom Research Integrity Office, today’s host of our discussion, was set up in 2006. Fourteen years earlier, in 1992, the US Department of Health had instituted the Office of Research Integrity, in response to anxieties running from the early 1980s about some well-publicised, even sensational, cases of scientific misconduct. An example would be the David Baltimore Affair. Later in 1997, responding also to what was felt to be rising cases of misconduct, all of them quite challenging to deal with, British journal editors, including Richard Horton of The Lancet, set up The Committee on Publication Ethics (‘COPE’). By this time the problem of scientific misconduct was raising serious issues for the journals, for the universities, and indeed for the whole concept of science as a truth-gathering exercise. Quite a range of interesting comment began to accumulate, with the MRC scientist Peter Lawrence FRS being notably influential through his thought-provoking 2002/3 Nature articles ‘Rank Injustice’ and The Politics of Publication. A particularly high-profile case in 2005/6, involving the multiple and well-publicised ethical transgressions of scientist Woo Suk Hwang, can be seen as a defining moment. Many reports and codes of conduct followed this 2005 watershed. One such code of conduct was Sir David King’s Rigour, Respect and Responsibility, which had its university launch at Imperial College in 2007. In the same year Imperial’s graduate school started its compulsory course ‘Science, Research and Integrity’, where neophyte scientists could discuss these issues, and – very importantly – give their point of view. It was as a result of Sir David King’s work, and courses similar to the one offered by Imperial, that a subtle but important shift occurred. While the misconduct cases we read about in those years seemed always to involve astonishing examples of individual frailty and corruption, leading to the view that we were dealing here with ‘bad apples’, wise heads, including those of PhD students, reminded us that if ethics always has an individual component, the institutional aspect is critically important too. Slowly we moved in the direction of this question: ‘How Can Our Institution Support Good Science?’ Then, in 2014, under the guidance of Professor Ottoline Leyser (now CEO of Research England), the Nuffield Council on Bioethics launched at Imperial College their seminal report ‘The Culture of Scientific Research’. This brave document made plain the issue of institutional responsibility. It asked: how can an institution make unethical behavior less likely? And, particularly, it seemed to imply that we must be as diligent in discussing culture as we are in chasing down example of misconduct. In sum, as I discuss in the webinar, discussions of research integrity have roots in very different styles of discourse: there is an alarm about misconduct, and there is an aspirational, fervent desire for something just as complex, ‘good science’. Does this ‘mix’ of discourse pose problems? What Does ‘Integrity’ Mean? While I wouldn’t say that the discourses of ‘misconduct’ and ‘integrity’ are wildly incompatible, some thought is needed over how to navigate a rather heterogeneous set of concepts. And while ‘misconduct’ centres on the transgression of fairly well-defined rules, it is hard to know quite what ‘research culture’ means. For example, should we talk about ‘research cultures’, in the plural? That might look like a good option, but then we remember the important philosophical tradition, still central today, that science is unified: it has a method; it doesn’t matter where you do your science or who you are; a scientific fact is the same, whether you are in Southampton or in Sydney. Culture scholars, however, spend a lot of their time exploring how cultures evolve, and how they remain sustainably different. Meanwhile a growing aspect of enhancing research culture relies on the idea that both in in our wider lives and in our laboratories, identity recognition is central to the flourishing of our working life. The word ‘integrity’ is usually defined as ‘honesty, the capacity to inspire well-founded trust, a position of moral worth’. However there is a second, equally important meaning. This is to do with wholeness, of different parts within a system being in communication, being in balance, and being mutual, interested and respectful. Research Integrity and Science Communication It is this second aspect of the word integrity that forms the basis of my short talk. I will be exploring how concepts like balance, and of course imbalance, are helpful tools in understanding research culture. At Imperial College we have been promoting the idea that research culture (among other things) is a matter of ethics. Similarly, at Imperial, we understand the ethics of research culture as broader than that routinely examined by research ethics committees. As I shall briefly suggest at the end of my talk, to attain the required ethical breadth, more to do with character and habit than with rules and policy, it may be helpful to study the great tradition of Virtue Ethics, stemming from Aristotle and the traditions of classical Athens.

Log in using your username and password

• Search More Search for this keyword Advanced search
• Latest content
• Current issue
• Write for Us
• BMJ Journals

You are here

• Online First
• Embracing diversity in nursing research: essential tips
• Article Text
• Article info
• Citation Tools
• Rapid Responses
• Article metrics

• Lorna Hollowood 1 ,
• Calvin Moorley 2
• 1 University of Birmingham , Birmingham , UK
• 2 London South Bank University School of Health and Social Care , London , UK
• Correspondence to Lorna Hollowood; L.hollowood{at}bham.ac.uk

https://doi.org/10.1136/ebnurs-2024-104183

Statistics from Altmetric.com

Request permissions.

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

Nursing is a profession that has always worked with diverse people and communities and has taken a social justice approach to care. Nursing has also undertaken research that includes diverse groups and communities. However, nurse researchers working with and undertaking research with diverse groups and communities may encounter problems in executing the research. This may be for reasons such as poor understanding of cultural and racial difference, not having an inclusive research team, for example, LGBTQIA+ researchers to help conduct LGBTQIA+ focused research or using an ableist approach, all of which can lead to exclusion, diminished trust and credibility. In this commentary, we draw on Hollowood’s doctoral journey and Moorley’s research experience, where both work with and research diverse communities’ health. Nurse researchers need to apply methodologies and approaches that are culturally sensitive and inclusive and here we offer essential tips, which have helped us by drawing on culturally specific and diversity-sensitive methods and frameworks to support inquiries which aim to improve the situation of the diverse communities nursing serves.

Choosing culturally sensitive theoretical frameworks and methodologies

Whiteness has dominated nursing, 1 and this also extends to nursing research where dominant western philosophies and methodologies are applied. Nurse researchers have not had many culturally and racially sensitive frameworks to choose from and so their research on, for example, race and culture has mainly used frameworks framed on whiteness and this can lead to health and care being interpreted, analysed and recommendations made based on white lens. One of the frameworks we advocate for is The Silences Framework. 2 It is a powerful tool to help uncover and understand marginalised discourses in research. This framework explicitly supports the researcher to identify and address the ‘silences’ which sit within a group and impact on their experiences and perspectives. ‘Silences’ refers to the areas of research that we know little about, …

Funding The authors have not declared a specific grant for this research from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors.

Competing interests None declared.

Provenance and peer review Commissioned; internally peer reviewed.

Read the full text or download the PDF:

• Open access
• Published: 02 September 2024

Traditionally used medicinal plants for human ailments and their threats in Guraferda District, Benchi-Sheko zone, Southwest Ethiopia

• Ashebir Awoke 1 ,
• Girma Gudesho 1 ,
• Fetku Akmel 1 &
• P. Shanmugasundaram 2  

Journal of Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine volume  20 , Article number:  82 ( 2024 ) Cite this article

Metrics details

The field of traditional medicine encompasses a wide range of knowledge, skills, and practices that are deeply rooted in the theories, beliefs, and experiences of different cultures. The research aimed to identify traditional medicinal plants used in Guraferda District and assess the threats they face.

A total of 96 individuals, 80 males and 16 females, were interviewed to gather ethnobotanical data. Statistical tests like independent t tests, ANOVA, correlation, and regression were conducted using R software version 4.3.2 to compare informant groups.

The study found 81 medicinal plant species in the district from 71 genera and 38 families, with Asteraceae and Solanaceae families having the most species. Leaves were the most commonly used plant part for medicine. Significant differences in plant knowledge were observed across genders, age groups, education levels, and experiences. The highest ICF value was for Dermal and Cutaneous ailments, and Cissampelos mucronata A. Rich and Bidens pilosa L. had the highest fidelity levels.

The study highlighted the importance of traditional medicinal plants in treating ailments but noted threats like overharvesting, habitat destruction, and climate change. Conservation efforts and sustainable harvesting practices are crucial to ensure the availability of these plants for future generations. Further research is needed to explore their potential for modern medicine and develop sustainable use strategies.

Traditional medicine encompasses a wide range of knowledge, skills, and practices that are based on the theories, beliefs, and experiences of diverse cultures [ 1 ]. Traditional medicinal plants have been a fundamental part of healthcare systems in many societies worldwide, with a history that may span over 4000 years, as noted by [ 2 , 3 ]. Medicinal plants serve as the primary source of healthcare for around 80% of the population in developing countries globally [ 4 , 5 ]. In Africa, plants have played a crucial role in treating a wide range of human ailments within indigenous communities, including traditional healers and herbalists [ 6 , 7 ].

In Ethiopia, traditional herbal remedies have been utilized for generations to address a variety of human health issues. This practice is rooted in cultural acceptance, affordability, cost-effectiveness, and accessibility. In many regions where modern healthcare services are scarce, rural communities heavily depend on traditional medicine as their main form of healthcare. The transmission of traditional knowledge typically occurs orally, with practitioners playing a vital role in passing down this valuable medicinal wisdom [ 8 ]. It is estimated that the country is home to a diverse array of approximately 6000 to 7000 higher plant species, with around 12% of these species being unique to the region. Over 800 plant species are utilized in Ethiopia for treating diverse ailments. TMPs use is common in both rural and urban areas, with people seeking these remedies alongside modern healthcare. Nearly 80% of the Ethiopian population depends on home remedies, and a significant majority of about 95% is derived from botanical sources [ 9 ].

The southwest forests of Ethiopia boast rich plant diversity, with 63% of the region's dense forests dedicated to preserving medicinal plants out of the country's 7000 species. These plants play a vital role in traditional medicine, addressing various health concerns in humans, as noted by [ 2 , 10 ]. However, the extensive knowledge of medicinal plants is under severe threat due to deforestation, environmental degradation, and population growth. These factors are endangering the country's forests, which are a crucial source of medicinal plants, leading to the loss of traditional knowledge.

Similar to other regions in Ethiopia, the inhabitants of Guraferda District have their own traditional methods for self-care. Moreover, the ecological makeup of Guraferda District encompasses highlands, midlands, and lowlands. Given this diverse ecological landscape, it is expected that the variety and traditional uses of medicinal plant species are more pronounced in this area.

The Guraferda District is encountering challenges to its traditional medicinal plants and indigenous knowledge, including expansion of agriculture, excessive harvesting, deforestation, modernization, and the introduction of invasive alien species. Therefore, conducting a comprehensive ethnobotanical study in Guraferda District is crucial to document and analyze the traditional knowledge and practices of the local people concerning medicinal plants for treating human illnesses, thereby contributing to the conservation and utilization of biodiversity. Furthermore, comparing the findings of this study with the Ethiopian ethnobotanical medicinal plant database will offer valuable insights into the regional distribution and utilization of medicinal plants, enhancing our understanding of Ethiopia's significant traditional plant-based healthcare system. With this in mind, the current study aims to gather, identify, and document medicinal plants and the associated indigenous knowledge used by local people to treat various human ailments in the study area. Additionally, it seeks to identify threats to medicinal plants and conservation practices while selecting medicinal plant species with high informant consensus and fidelity level values for future phytochemical analyses.

Materials and methods

Description of the study area.

The research was conducted in the Guraferda District, situated in the Benchi-Sheko Zone of Southwest Ethiopia, approximately 602 km southwest of Addis Ababa and 42 km from Mizan Teferi. Geographically located between latitude 6°51′24.6′′N and longitude 35°20′02.1′′E, with an altitude range of 500–2500 m, the district spans 2565.42 km 2 and includes 32 kebeles and an administrative town named Biftu. The estimated population from 2014 to 2017 is 43,137, with 23,473 males and 19,664 females, predominantly residing in rural areas [ 11 ]. The 2023 report from the Guraferda District Health Office highlights several prevalent ailments in the district, including febrile illness, wounds, malaria, tonsillitis, and typhoid. However, the provision of healthcare services in rural areas of the district is insufficient. The report identifies a shortage of healthcare clinics, hospitals, medical equipment, reagents, tablets, skilled healthcare professionals, and logistical support as the main reasons for this deficiency (Fig. 1 ).

Map of study site (generated by ArcGIS 10.4.1)

In the Guraferda District, the agro ecosystems comprise of predominantly lowland (wet qolla) areas, accounting for 78% of the total area, while the midland (Woynadaga) areas make up the remaining 22%. The mean yearly temperature of the region is 21.1 °C, while the average annual precipitation is approximately 1974 mm (Fig.  2 ).

The climate diagram of Biftu town illustrates the distribution of rainfall and variation in temperature over the period of 2002 to 2022

Research methods

Reconnaissance survey.

A preliminary investigation was carried out between September 12 and 29, 2023, in order to acquire data and develop a cognitive representation of the kebeles landscape that would be sampled. The individuals involved were identified, and a suitable timeframe for data collection was established. Approaches for gathering and arranging information relating to the existing TMPK wereided upon.

Research design

The research methodology employed in this study encompassed a cross-sectional design, which effectively combined qualitative data in a non-numerical format, specifically in the form of images, with quantitative data that were presented using descriptive and inferential statistics.

Study site and informant selection

The study sites and informants were selected through information gathered from various sources like the Guraferda District administration, health, and agricultural offices, as well as local residents. This ensured a comprehensive understanding of the area. Eight kebeles (Table  1 ) were chosen based on factors like proximity to Biftu, healer presence, infrastructure, and security concerns [ 2 , 11 ]. A total of 96 informants, aged 18 to 80, were interviewed during the study. Twelve individuals were selected from each of the eight kebeles. Thirty-two key informants were chosen through purposive sampling based on recommendations, while 64 general informants were selected through snowball sampling from the local population in the study area as proposed by [ 12 ]. The study included participants aged 18–80, categorized into young adults (18–30), middle-aged (31–55), and elderly (56–80) groups [ 13 ]. The focus was on individuals under 30 to investigate knowledge transfer on medicinal plants between generations [ 14 ].

Methods of ethnobotanical data collection

Ethnobotanical surveys were conducted in selected kebeles within Guraferda District to gather information on traditional medicinal plants. The data collection process continued until no new information on new medicinal plants emerged. In order to obtain the required information, interviews were conducted with local healers, community members, and traditional medicine practitioners using the following methods.

Semi-structured interview

Semi-structured interviews were conducted in the local languages of Sheko, Meinit, Benchi, Wolyita, Amharic, Oromiffa, Kaffa, and Sidamo with the help of a translator. Participants shared personal details and information on medicinal plants, including indigenous names, usage, habitats, availability, preparation, dosage, and administration. Interviews also covered plant conservation, additional ingredients in remedies, side effects, antidotes, knowledge sources, and knowledge transfer methods. Traditional healers were asked about their practice duration and compensation. The goal was to document medicinal plant whereabouts, threats, conservation practices, comprehensive uses, and non-medicinal applications. This approach was influenced by [ 12 , 15 ].

Group discussion

To gather community-level information on traditional medicinal plants (TMPs), focus group discussions were held in each kebele with an average of five participants per group. Excluding the 96 previously selected informants, topics covered included TMP knowledge, threats, conservation, modernization impact, and commercialization. Discussions were open and interactive, allowing free expression of opinions.

Field observation

Field observations were carried out to facilitate extensive communication with individual informants, allowing for the identification and collection of medicinal plants that are traditionally utilized in their natural environment.

Guided field walk

Proper field guides were consulted for guided field walks in accessible yet potentially hazardous sites. Selection was based on participants' navigation skills and knowledge of local plant species. During walks, sensory experiences like visual observations and interactions with traditional healers aided in identifying medicinal plants. Voucher specimens were collected using digital photography in various settings.

Market survey

A market survey in the District covered five major markets to assess the marketability of traditional medicinal plants (TMPs). Data on availability, price, and units were collected and analyzed to determine usage and revenue potential. Samples of TMP vouchers were collected with local assistance. Verbal interviews with market stakeholders provided insights on marketing practices, cultivation, availability, threats, prices, and economic value [ 16 ].

Plant collection, identification, and herbarium preparation

Data were collected from November 2023 to January 2024 with informant’s assistance. Plant species were collected with respondent assistance, and a medicinal plant inventory was compiled with local names and photographs. Information on remedies was gathered from traditional medicine practitioners and informants through semi-structured interviews. Plant collection involved assigning local names, pressing, drying, and mounting specimens as noted by [ 14 ]. Fruit and seed preservation involved envelopes and plant presses. Identification was done in the field and at Mizan-Tepi University using taxonomic keys and online tools. Voucher specimens were preserved in the university's herbarium for future reference.

Data analysis

The field data were collected, compiled, categorized, and documented, including local and scientific plant names, families, life forms, parts used, and habitats in Microsoft Word 2019. The analysis utilized frequency tools like pie charts, bar graphs, and tables. Descriptive statistics (mean and standard deviation) were calculated using R program version 4.3.2. Normality was assessed with Shapiro–Wilk test before t test. An independent t test examined gender disparities in TMPK based on reported plants. Another t test explored knowledge variations among education levels and healing experiences. ANOVA assessed knowledge differences by age groups. Linear regression and Pearson correlation analyzed the relationship between age and reported plants [ 18 ].

Quantitative analysis of ethnobotanical data

Ethnobotanical data analysis was conducted by employing the R software version 4.3.2, in conjunction with manual formulation.

Plant part value (PPV)

The plant part value calculation presents the percentage of plant parts like stems, leaves, roots, fruits, bark, and flowers used for biopharmaceutical purposes, following the methodology by [ 17 ], and it is computed in the following manner:

where ∑RU (plant part) represents the sum of the cited plant parts and ∑ RU represents the total number of cited uses for a given plant.

Preference ranking

A study was carried out to determine the preference order of TMPs for treating human and domestic animal ailments, using data collected from ten key informants. Medicinal plants were evaluated and ranked according to their effectiveness using scores. Similarly, a preference ranking of threatening factors impacting TMPs was established by randomly selecting 10 key informants as outlined by [ 16 ].

Direct matrix ranking

The direct matrix ranking was conducted in order to compare multipurpose MPs commonly reported by informants following Cotton (1996). Based on the relative benefits obtained from each plant, five multipurpose MPs were selected out of the total medicinal plants and seven use categories of these plants were listed. Five key informants were chosen to assign use values to each attribute (5 = best, 4 = very good, 3 = good, 2 = less used, 1 = least used, and 0 = not used). Using the information provided by the informants, the average value of each use-diversity for a species was calculated, and the values for each species were then summed up and ranked accordingly [ 12 , 16 , 18 ].

Informant consensus factor (ICF)

The ICF study identified key human ailments in the district and potential medicinal plants for treatment. Traditional remedies were categorized into ten groups. The ICF formula is:

where Nur = number of use reports from informants for a particular plant-use category; Nt = number of taxa or species that are used for that plant use category for all informants. The index ranges from 0 to 1, with values nearing 1 signifying a strong consensus among informants in the utilization of the same species [ 19 ].

Fidelity level (FL)

The relative healing potential of medicinal plants in treating human ailments was assessed by employing a fidelity level (FL), as proposed by [ 20 ]. The computation of fidelity level (FL) was carried out using the following formula:

where FL  = fidelity level or relative healing potential, IP  = the number of informants who independently cited the importance of a species for treating a particular ailment (frequency of citation of a species for a particular aliment), and IU  = the total number of informants who reported the medicinal plant for a given disease (total number of citations of that species).

Ethical clearance

The Guraferda District Administration Office collaborated with the Department of Biology at Mizan-Tepi University (MTU) to conduct research in kebeles. District Administrations granted permission for fieldwork after acknowledging cooperation letters. Official authorization letters were sent to various offices and sample kebeles. This collaboration aimed to enhance community involvement, facilitate data collection, and provide guidance during interviews. Chairpersons of kebeles provided cooperation letters, data on households, recommended key informants, and arranged interview meetings. Informants gave oral consent during group discussions before sharing ethnobotanical knowledge willingly during interviews.

Results and discussion

Sociodemographic attributes of informants in the study area.

In this study, a total of 96 participants were involved. The majority of the participants were male, accounting for 83.3% ( n  = 80), while the remaining 16.7% ( n  = 16) were female. When considering the healing experience, the majority of the participants were classified as general informants, making up 66.7% ( n  = 64), followed by key informants at 33.3% ( n  = 32). The age range of the participants included in the study varied from 18 to 80 years old. Among them, the largest proportion fell within the age group of 56–80, comprising 53.1% ( n  = 51), followed by the age group of 31–55, accounting for 30.2% ( n  = 29). The education levels of the participants ranged from illiteracy to college level. The majority of the participants were found to be illiterate, representing 70.8% ( n  = 68), followed by those who had completed elementary school at 21.8% ( n  = 21). In terms of marital status, the majority of the participants were married at 82.2% ( n  = 79), followed by single individuals at 13.5% ( n  = 13) (Table 2 ).

Medicinal plant knowledge among different ethnic groups

The information on the dissemination of medicinal knowledge among the most referenced ethnic groups in the Guraferda District provides insight into the diverse traditional healing practices deeply embedded in the cultural heritage of the Sheko, Amhara, Meinit, and Kefa communities. These ethnic groups, with percentages of 33.3%, 20.8%, 14.6%, and 11.5%, respectively, are recognized as preservers of valuable medicinal wisdom transmitted across generations. Their profound connection to local flora and fauna, as well as cultural customs, likely contributes to their higher reported percentages. Conversely, the Sidama and Wolyita ethnic groups, with percentages of 3.1%, seem to possess lower levels of documented medicinal knowledge, indicating a potential necessity for further investigation and documentation of their traditional healing methods. This contrast underscores the importance of acknowledging and safeguarding the diverse range of medicinal knowledge upheld by various ethnic groups within the Guraferda District to leverage the potential advantages for healthcare practices in the area. The distribution of medicinal knowledge among the most cited ethnic groups in the Guraferda District of Ethiopia reveals a complex interplay between cultural practices, environmental factors, and historical traditions. The significantly higher percentages reported by the Sheko, Amhara, Meinit, and Kefa ethnic groups highlight the deep-rooted connection these communities have with their natural surroundings and traditional healing practices. Their reliance on local flora and fauna for medicinal purposes underscores the intimate relationship between culture and nature, where indigenous knowledge is passed down through generations as a vital part of community identity.

The lower reported percentages of medicinal knowledge among the Sidama and Wolyita ethnic groups suggest a potential divergence in traditional healing practices within the Guraferda district. This could be attributed to a variety of factors, including historical influences, access to resources, and cultural assimilation. Further exploration into the specific medicinal practices of these ethnic groups could provide valuable insights into the diversity of healing traditions present in the region and help bridge gaps in healthcare access and understanding.

Medicinal plants naming related to culture in the study area

The nomenclature of medicinal plants often incorporates meanings that are related to their use or other suggestive information about the plants. This information was uncovered by examining the local names assigned to various medicinal plant species. Among these species, some of the local names directly indicate their medicinal properties, while others describe physical attributes such as growth form, trunk color, leaf shape, toxicity, taste, and smell. It is important to mention that all of the medicinal plant species studied have local names in one or more languages spoken in the districts being investigated. These names are occasionally used interchangeably or with slight variations in pronunciation among different communities. Additionally, there are cases where a single local name is used to refer to multiple species that possess similar medicinal properties.

For instance, the local name “Qey Shnkur” is used to refer to Allium cepa L. due to the red color of its bulb. Similarly, “Gutichaa” is used for Acmella caulirhiza Delile because its leaves resemble the shape of an earring. “Wotetie” is the local name for Lactuca serriola L., chosen because of its sap that resembles milk. “Yeayit jero” is used to describe Centella asiatica (L.) Urb, as its leaf structure resembles that of a rat's ear. “Michi-charo” is the local name for Ocimum lamiifolium Hochst. ex Benth., as it is known to locally cure febrile illness called “mich.” Lastly, “Shiferaw” is the local name for Moringa oleifera Lam., as it is believed to treat various diseases.

Traditional medicinal plants used to treat human ailments

Diversity of medicinal plants in guraferda district.

The utilization of medicinal plants by the inhabitants of Guraferda District was investigated, resulting in the identification of a total of 81 species. These species belong to 38 families and 71 genera of plants (Table  12 ). The local population relies on these plants to address a wide range of human ailments, encompassing approximately 40 different ailments. This finding surpasses the numbers reported in Ethiopia by [ 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 ], which reported 60, 29, 63, 72, and 12 plant species, respectively. Similarly, compared to reports from other parts of the world by [ 26 , 27 , 28 ], which reported 42, 55, and 37 plant species, respectively, the number of medicinal plants found in Guraferda District is higher. The variation in the number of medicinal plants found in different study areas may be attributed to factors such as the area of vegetation type, the number of informants involved in the study, the time of data collection, and the duration and culture of the area, as suggested by [ 29 ]. The prevalence of herbal treatments for human ailments in Guraferda District indicates the reliance of the local population on traditional medicines. This reliance may be influenced by factors such as the high cost of modern medications, the limited availability and accessibility of modern health services, and the cultural acceptance of herbal medicines, as also observed in other regions of Ethiopia by [ 30 , 31 , 32 ].

Notably, the families Asteraceae and Solanaceae were the most frequently mentioned, with each accounting for 11.1% of the species cited (9 species each). Additionally, the families Euphorbiaceae, Cucurbitaceae, Fabaceae, and Rutaceae were also mentioned, representing 6.2% and 5 species each, and 4.9% and 4 species, respectively (Table  3 ). This suggests that these plant families were widely utilized for the treatment of human ailments. This finding aligns with previous reports from Ethiopia [ 25 , 33 , 34 , 35 , 36 , 37 ] as well as other countries worldwide [ 38 , 39 ]. In contrast, the families Fabaceae, Poaceae, Amaranthaceae, and Apocynaceae were frequently reported in Pakistan [ 40 ]. This could be attributed to the wider distribution and abundance of these plant families in the flora region, in terms of the number of taxa [ 29 ]. This indicates that easily accessible plant species are often preferred by individuals, as long as they are not harmful [ 41 , 42 ].

Growth form of medicinal plants

The findings of the study indicate that medicinal plants can be categorized into different groups based on their habits. Among these groups, herbs were found to be the most abundant, comprising 55.5% of the total number of species recorded (45 species). Following herbs, shrubs constituted 22.2% (18 species), while trees accounted for 16% (13 species) (Fig.  3 ). Climbers, on the other hand, represented the smallest proportion with only 6.2% (5 species). The abundance of herbal species may be due to favorable climate conditions, such as high rainfall. Herbs are preferred for treating ailments due to their availability and effectiveness, as noted by scholars [ 2 , 33 ], both locally and globally [ 38 , 40 , 43 ]. This trend could be seen as positive for plant conservation, as herbs have shorter growth cycles and require less space for cultivation compared to trees. However, seasonal herbs may not be accessible at certain times, especially if sourced from the wild [ 8 ].

Growth forms of medicinal plants for human Ailments

In contrast, a larger number of studies have reported the use of shrubs and trees [ 9 , 13 , 44 , 45 , 46 ], both locally and globally [ 47 , 48 , 49 , 50 , 51 , 52 , 53 ]. This could be due to their annual availability and their ability to withstand drought and invasive alien species, making them suitable for widespread use [ 13 ]. Furthermore, this suggests a variation in medicinal plant utilization due to differences in culture, agroecologies, topographic features, and the ease of access to the species [ 54 ].

Habitat of medicinal plants

The collection of medicinal plants in the study area involved sourcing from diverse outlets, namely the wild, home gardens, and the market. Out of the 81 medicinal plants identified, 38 (47%) were procured from the wild, 19 (23.4%) from home gardens (HG), 15 (18.5%) from the market, and 9 (11.1%) from both the wild and home gardens (Fig.  4 ). Human activities are shrinking these habitats due to population growth, jeopardizing many wild medicinal plants. This aligns with global reliance on wild habitats for medicinal plants. Efforts to cultivate and sustainably use these plants are needed to reverse the line. This information is supported by the work of [ 55 , 56 , 57 , 58 ], as well as research conducted by [ 53 , 59 , 60 ].

Sources of medicinal plants for human ailments

Medicinal plant parts used for human ailments

The study's findings indicated that 12 specific parts of medicinal plants were identified as the primary constituents utilized for addressing various health problems. The analysis of plant parts, based on the total frequency of citations by informants, demonstrated that out of a total of 213 reports on plant parts, the most commonly employed components for the preparation of remedies were leaves (47%, 100), roots (20.1%, 43), seeds (11.1%, 25), bulbs (6.1%, 13), and fruits (5.2%, 11). Furthermore, stem and rhizome (2.3%, 5 each), the whole part (1.4%, 3), as well as flower, latex, bark, and tuber (0.9%, 2 each) were also mentioned by the informants (Fig.  5 ). This aligns with other studies showing leaves are frequently used in traditional medicine due to their availability, ease of use, and effectiveness due to high concentration of secondary metabolites. However, over-harvesting leaves during dry seasons can be challenging and harmful to plants' reproductive processes. This information is supported by the work of various researchers, such as [ 9 , 11 , 31 ], and elsewhere in the world [ 61 , 62 , 63 ].

Most cited medicinal plant parts

Contrary to these findings, other studies have reported the prevalence of roots over other plant parts, as well as stems and whole plants, in traditional medicine. This information was supported by the work of various researchers, such as [ 2 , 23 , 44 ], and elsewhere in the world [ 45 , 59 , 65 , 66 , 67 , 68 , 69 ]. Year-round accessibility of fresh roots makes them a popular choice for medicine, but over-harvesting threatens medicinal plants like Securidaca longepedunculata Fresen and Echinops kebericho Mesfin in Guraferda District. Similarly, studies conducted in other parts of Ethiopia and the worlds have indicated that overutilization of root parts poses a threat to medicinal plants such as [ 2 , 59 ].

Forms of medicinal plant used for human ailments

The analysis results for the condition of the plant used, based on the frequency of citations by informants, revealed that out of the total 226 reports on plant usage, the majority of medicinal plants were found to be prepared solely from fresh plant materials (65.4%, 148). Following this, a significant portion of medicinal plants were prepared from dry conditions (31.4%, 71). A small percentage of medicinal plants (3.2%, 7) were prepared exclusively from either fresh or dry plant material (Fig.  6 ). This finding aligns with previous research conducted by various scholars who also reported the use of freshly collected plant parts for traditional medicine preparation [ 2 , 13 , 41 , 69 ]. Furthermore, similar practices have been observed in different parts of the world [ 47 , 51 , 62 ]. Traditional healers argue that the healing potential of certain medicinal plants diminishes if they are not used in their fresh condition. Consequently, there appears to be limited utilization of dry storage for future use, as highlighted by previous studies [ 2 , 70 , 71 ]. Due to the lack of efforts in conserving dried plant matter, the frequent gathering of fresh plant parts may pose a threat to the plants, particularly during dry seasons. The reliance of local communities on fresh plant parts can be attributed to the perceived effectiveness of these species in therapy, as the beneficial ingredients are not lost during the drying process. However, this dependency on fresh plant materials also poses a potential risk for the loss of these valuable medicinal plants [ 41 , 72 ].

Mode of medicinal plants preparation

Different approaches were utilized to create the traditional remedy, taking into account the nature of the ailments, as well as the condition and components of the medicinal plant. Pounding was the preferred method for preparing dried plant parts, whereas crushing was employed for fresh ones. The research findings highlighted that informants reported a total of 211 modes of preparation frequency for medicinal plants. Notably, the majority of plants were prepared by crushing (66.4%, 140), followed by powdered (18%, 38), and concoction (15.6%, 33) (Fig.  7 ). Crushing aids quick bioactive extraction for immediate relief, often using single plant parts or mixtures from different plants. These findings align with similar results reported by [ 8 , 76 , 77 ] both locally and globally [ 78 ]. In contrast, other studies have found that powdering was the dominant method of traditional medicine preparation by local people, as observed in the works of [ 75 , 79 , 80 ] as well as in various cultural groups worldwide [ 37 , 64 ].

Mode of medicinal plants preparation for human ailments

Route of medicinal plant administration and application

The study found that informants mentioned route of administration 173 times. Oral administration was most common (54.3%, 94 citations), followed by dermal (34.1%, 59 citations) and nasal (8.1%, 14 citations) routes. Other routes like optical, auricular, vaginal, and anal each accounted for 1.2% (2 citations) and 0.6% (1 citation), respectively (Fig.  8 ). This trend is in agreement with findings from various studies in Ethiopia [ 23 , 35 , 81 ] and globally [ 39 , 52 , 64 , 68 ]. This preference for oral and dermal routes may be attributed to the effectiveness of these methods in rapidly interacting with pathogens' physiology and enhancing curative potency, as well as the prevalence of internal ailment in the study area. Dermal administration is favored due to its lower potential for absorption and toxicity, and its ease of application for patients, as supported by previous reports [ 23 , 44 , 82 ]. The treatment was administered through various methods, including creams and tying for dermal administration, and chewing, eating, and drinking for oral administration. Nasal administration involved fumigating and inhaling, while auricular administration entailed dropping the solution into the ear. Optical administration included the use of ointments or drops, and anal administration involved dropping or creaming. Vaginal administration was carried out by inserting the treatment, consistent with the findings of [ 33 , 36 , 83 ].

Most cited route of medicinal plant administration for human ailments

Diagnosis and treatment methods of patients

In Guraferda District, 40 human ailments were reported, with malaria, typhoid, wound, stomachache, diarrhea, tonsillitis, ringworm being most prevalent (Table  12 ). The community relies more on traditional healers than modern medicine. Common symptoms include diarrhea, fever, itching, sweating, weakness, headaches, and discomfort. Healers diagnose through visual inspection and interviews, assessing symptoms like skin color, throat condition, and body temperature. Treatment involves herbal remedies for swellings, direct application or bandaging for wounds, and chewing medicinal plants for throat and abdominal issues. Economic, cultural, and availability factors drive the community's preference for traditional healthcare over distant centers. Similar trends are seen globally. These factors were highlighted by [ 2 , 13 , 55 ], as well as in studies conducted elsewhere in the world by [ 39 , 59 ]. Local healers primarily use visual inspection for diagnosis, identifying disorders based on body temperature, skin color, appetite, and appearance. Similar diagnostic methods have been reported by other researchers in Ethiopia [ 2 , 13 , 55 ] as well as in different cultural groups worldwide [ 73 , 74 ]. Misidentification of ailment due to these methods can lead to incorrect diagnoses and inappropriate prescriptions, potentially resulting in adverse effects on the patients. This issue has been highlighted by [ 75 ].

Medicinal plants dosage and antidotes

In the study area, various units of measurement and timeframes were used by the local community for medicinal dosages. These included finger widths, hand sizes, and liquid measuring tools like fera and gini, as well as numerical approximations for plant parts. This observation aligns with the findings of [ 82 , 84 , 85 ]. The findings indicated that dosages of remedies for various ailments were determined based on factors such as the patient's age, pregnancy status, physical characteristics, and gender, with traditional healers lacking standardized measurements or guidelines. This observation was consistent with the work of [ 24 , 41 , 80 ]. Informants reported minimal side effects from traditional medicines. Overdosing caused issues like vomiting, diarrhea, burning sensations, and fainting, especially with plants like Phytolacca dodecandra , Justicia schimperiana , and Datura stramonium . This outcome is consistent with the findings of [ 2 , 56 , 82 , 86 ]. In the study area, traditional healers used antidotes like niger seed, sorghum borde, sugar, honey, coffee, tea, water, butter, milk, yogurt, bulla, teff porridge, barley, and rice broth to stabilize disorders. This finding is consistent with reports from other parts of the country, as documented by [ 24 , 41 , 80 ].

Marketability of medicinal plants

Out of the 15 species of medicinal plants examined, only five were actively sold for medicinal use: Echinops kebericho Mesfin, Securidaca longepedunculata Fresen, Olea europaea , Clausena anisata , Artemisia abyssinica , and Withania somnifera . The rest were sold in bulk for non-medicinal purposes but used as medicine when needed. In local markets like Megenteya, Semerta, Gabika, Meleya, and Bebeka, prices varied: Echinops kebericho and Securidaca longepedunculata roots cost 10 Ethiopian Birr, while Artemisia abyssinica , Withania somnifera leaves, Olea europaea , and Clausena anisata stem slices were priced at 20 Birr. Other plants like Solanum americanum and Brassica nigra were sold in bulk for non-medicinal uses but also used in traditional medicine.

Efficacy of medicinal plants used for treating human ailments

The ICF results showed higher consensus factors for human ailments in the study area, particularly in the dermal (ICF = 0.90), and digestive system (ICF = 0.88). Conversely, the musculoskeletal & nervous system category had the lowest ICF value (0.60) (Table  4 ), suggesting limited sharing of knowledge among traditional healers. This lack of interaction may be due to distance and secrecy. Different habitats may lead healers to use different medicinal plants for the same ailments. Informants shared important knowledge on medicinal plants for common ailments, even though some species had lower use values, indicating their effectiveness despite being known by only a few healers. These findings are consistent with the reports of [ 87 , 88 , 89 , 90 ].

Relative healing potential of medicinal plants

The fidelity level of medicinal plants reflects their effectiveness for specific ailments. In this study, plants like Cissampelos mucronata A. Rich (FL = 1, 100%) for stomachaches, Bidens pilosa L. (FL = 1, 100%) for wounds, and Musa accuminata Colla. (FL = 0.73, 73%) for eczema showed high efficacy. Plants with high FL values should be conserved and managed. Conversely, plants like Ocimum lamiifolium Hochst.ex Benth (FL = 0.42, 42%) had lower healing potential for fevers, as indicated by their lower FL values (Table  5 ). These findings are consistent with the results reported by [ 2 , 55 , 91 , 92 ].

The most preferred plants for treating human ailments

The findings indicated that the local community's preference for medicinal plants was based on their experiences and their ability to distinguish effective plants for treating their ailments. Among the plants used for treating wounds, Bidens pilosa L. was the most favored species, followed by Datura stramonium L. and Commelina benghalensis L. Conversely, Sida rhombifolia and Croton macrostachyus were found to be the most preferred plant species for wound treatment (Table  6 ), contrasting the previous findings [ 29 , 92 , 93 ]. The local community heavily relies on plants for various purposes, including construction, food, and medicine. Cordia africana Lam. is ranked as the most threatened, while Securidaca longepedunculata Fresen and Olea europaea (Wall. ex G. Don) Cif are preferred for multiple uses in Guraferda District. Conservation efforts are needed to protect these valuable plant species. This finding aligns with the findings of [ 30 , 55 , 56 , 77 , 83 , 94 ] which indicated that Cordia africana Lam. was a multipurpose medicinal plant in their respective study areas. In contrast, the report of [ 23 , 95 ] revealed that Croton macrostachyus Del. was the most multipurpose plant species.

Medicinal plants like Echinops kebericho Mesfin in Guraferda District are at risk due to high market demand for their roots, leading to scarcity. This finding aligns with the conclusions drawn in the works of [ 2 , 9 , 34 , 79 , 96 , 97 , 98 , 99 , 100 ].

Direct matrix ranking of multipurpose medicinal plants

The output of the direct matrix ranking (DMR) exercise on five multipurpose medicinal plants used for treating human ailments enabled to identify which of the multipurpose plants is under greater pressure than other species in the area along with the respective factors that threaten the plants. Accordingly, Cordia africana Lam. was ranked first (most—threatened) followed by Securidaca longepedunculata Fresen and Olea europaea (Wall. ex G. Don) Cif (Table  7 ). Results indicated that these multipurpose medicinal plant species are currently exploited more for construction, firewood and timber production purposes than for their medicinal uses.

Comparison of knowledge among different informant groups

Comparison of knowledge between key and general informants.

Key informants scored significantly higher (5.6 ± 1.5) in medicinal plant knowledge than general informants (2.5 ± 1.4), with a t -value of 9.6 and p  < 0.05, indicating a substantial difference. Key informants demonstrate superior understanding of traditional medicinal practices compared to general informants in the study area. This finding is consistent with the conclusions drawn in the works of [ 11 , 31 , 77 , 83 , 101 ]. In contrast to this finding, the report of [ 76 ] indicated that there was no significant difference in medicinal plant knowledge between key informants and general informants. The substantial knowledge gap between key and general informants underscores the value of leveraging key informants' expertise in medicinal plants. Targeted education can bridge this gap, fostering sustainable practices and preserving traditional knowledge.

Comparison of knowledge between gender

Male informants had higher average knowledge scores (3.9 ± 1.9) compared to female informants (1.8 ± 1.2), with a significant difference indicated by a t -value of 5.3 ( p  < 0.05) (Table  8 ). This outcome aligns with the findings of [ 11 , 30 , 83 , 102 , 103 ]. Contrary to this discovery, [ 104 ] found that females possess more knowledge about medicinal plants than males. Moreover, other researchers, such as [ 77 , 101 ], reported that both males and females have equal knowledge of medicinal plants. Gender disparities in medicinal plant knowledge within the community highlight potential cultural, social, or historical factors influencing knowledge acquisition and transmission between male and female informants. Furthermore, other researchers [ 11 , 102 ] noted that traditional knowledge on medicine is typically passed down to sons rather than daughters in many parts of Ethiopia through verbal communication. Therefore, such bias may have contributed to the observed difference. Additionally, healers may prefer males to pass on their indigenous medicinal plant knowledge because of the belief that only males can access plant species in distant sites and forests. These findings underscore the need for targeted interventions to address gender disparities in traditional medicinal knowledge. Further research is essential to develop inclusive programs and policies that empower women and promote gender equality in resource management.

Comparison of knowledge among different age groups

A one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) was performed using R software to investigate the impact of age category (young, middle, and elder) on the scores of medicinal knowledge among informants. The results of the ANOVA indicated a significant main effect of age category (F (2, 93) = 15.53, p  < 0.05), suggesting that there were notable differences in medicinal knowledge scores across the three age categories. The variance between the groups (age) (SS = 118.2, MS = 59.08) was considerably higher than the residual or within-groups variance (SS = 353.7, MS = 3.80) (Table  9 ), indicating that the disparities in medicinal plant knowledge were influenced by the age categories of the participants.

Further analysis using Tukey's HSD post hoc tests revealed that the elder group exhibited significantly higher mean scores ( M  = 4.3, SD = 2.2, p  < 0.05) compared to both the middle group ( M  = 3, SD = 1.6, p  < 0.05) and the young group ( M  = 1.3, SD = 0.9, p  < 0.05). These findings imply that older informants tend to possess more extensive knowledge of medicinal plants compared to younger informants. This discrepancy may be attributed to the transmission of cultural traditions and practices across generations, as well as the increased exposure to traditional medicine practices over time. This study aligns with the research of [ 13 , 30 , 31 , 83 , 102 ], and others in different countries [ 38 ], which also found that older individuals cited more medicinal plant species than younger individuals. This may be due to the elders' extensive experience in using local medicinal plants for various ailments in traditional ways, while younger generations are influenced by modernization and globalization, leading to areas interest in traditional practices.

The research highlights the importance of conserving traditional medicinal practices. Age influences knowledge of medicinal plants, informing targeted educational programs. Variation across age groups underscores older generations' expertise. A strong positive correlation ( r  = 0.722) confirms age-related knowledge differences, with older individuals possessing greater expertise (Fig.  9 ). This significant relationship emphasizes the need to preserve and pass on traditional medicinal knowledge. This finding aligns with the findings of [ 13 , 76 , 83 , 102 ]. The regression analysis found β 0 and β 1 estimates of − 1.43 and 0.1, respectively, with p  < 0.05 significance. Age categories show a significant correlation with medicinal plant knowledge. The β 0 of − 1.43 indicates the lowest age category's projected knowledge. β 1 of 0.1 shows a positive relationship between age and knowledge (Fig.  10 ). The R-squared value of 0.523 reveals age explains 52.3% of knowledge variance, emphasizing its impact. Older informants have more medicinal plant knowledge, highlighting traditional wisdom importance. This study underscores the value of older generations' expertise in traditional medicine practices, emphasizing the need to preserve and pass on their knowledge.

Correlation model for medicinal plant knowledge by informant age

Regression model for medicinal plant knowledge by informant age

Transfer of traditional medicinal knowledge

In the study area, traditional medicinal plant knowledge is orally transmitted within families, often by eldest sons, with some sharing with trusted neighbors and relatives. These findings are consistent with the research of [ 90 , 91 , 106 ]. Older generations hold valuable traditional knowledge on medicinal plants, but this is endangered due to elders' passing. Modern influences like medicine, education, and societal changes contribute to this line. Traditional healers keep their knowledge private to maintain healing power and income. Secrecy is crucial for indigenous healers known as Tenquay (Magician). This finding aligns with the outcomes of numerous additional investigations [ 29 , 41 , 82 , 90 , 98 , 106 , 107 ]. Moreover, Younger generation's reluctance to learn traditional medicine threatens loss of valuable information as older healers pass without sharing knowledge [ 41 , 98 , 108 ]

Threats and conservation practices of medicinal plants

The deforestation, overharvesting, invasive species, and lining use of traditional medicine due to modernization are key risks to medicinal plants (Table  10 ). Excessive harvesting of Echinops kebericho root for fumigation and Securidaca longepedunculata for treatment of various ailments, along with habitat loss for agriculture, threatens these plants (Table  11 ). The study highlights deforestation as the main threat to medicinal plants in the districts, consistent with research in other Ethiopian regions. Loss of valuable information is also a concern as younger generations show reluctance to learn traditional medicine from older healers [ 36 , 90 , 100 , 109 , 110 ].

Invasive species like Parthenium hysterophorus and Lantana camara threaten medicinal plants in Gurafeda District, outcompeting local species and disrupting the ecosystem balance, potentially leading to extinction [ 78 , 111 , 112 , 113 , 114 ]. This has emerged as a key factor contributing to the line of herbaceous medicinal plants. Furthermore, other researchers have highlighted Prosopisiflora as another invasive alien species posing a threat to medicinal plant species [ 70 , 114 ]. Likewise, the research indicates that multipurpose species are especially at risk, as they encounter various threats. This discovery aligns with earlier studies [ 34 , 90 , 91 , 107 ] (Table  12 ).

These medicinal plant species were not solely grown for medicinal purposes; rather, they were also used for food, spices, commercial value, and other applications. The most commonly employed cultivation methods for medicinal plant species included home gardens ( Ruta chalepensis L.), coffee shade ( Cordia Africana Lam.), live fences ( Justicia schimperiana (Hochst. Ex Nees) T. Anders.), roadsides ( Eucalyptus globulus Labill.), and agricultural fields mixed with other crops. The findings also suggest a lack of community-based conservation efforts undertaken by the local population in the district. This observation is consistent with previous research [ 91 , 108 , 115 ].

Conclusion and recommendation

The lack of concerted efforts to conserve medicinal plants and indigenous knowledge in the Guraferda District is indeed concerning. Traditional practitioners play a crucial role in preserving this valuable heritage, but their limited cultivation efforts indicate a need for external support. Government intervention is essential to create a comprehensive conservation strategy that includes both the preservation of plant species and the safeguarding of traditional knowledge. Supporting traditional practitioners in cultivating medicinal plants in homegardens can help ensure a sustainable supply of these valuable resources. By providing training, resources, and incentives, the government can empower local communities to take an active role in preserving their natural and cultural heritage. In addition to cultivation, measures such as establishing protected areas, promoting sustainable harvesting practices, and conducting research on medicinal plants can contribute to their long-term conservation. Collaborative efforts involving government agencies, local communities, and other stakeholders are crucial to effectively address the challenges facing medicinal plant conservation in the district.

Recommendation

Based on the study's findings, it is recommended to avoid uprooting medicinal plant species prematurely and instead focus on utilizing other plant parts like leaves. This will help safeguard the species from extinction. Collaborating with traditional healers to conduct scientific research can validate the efficacy and safety of traditional remedies. In situ and ex situ conservation strategies should be developed, prioritizing plants with remedial roots and high value. Establishing a traditional healers' association with professional support can enhance healthcare integration. Setting up medicinal plant nurseries in partnership with the Agriculture Office can aid in propagating preferred species for cultivation. Implementing these recommendations will support sustainable use and conservation of medicinal plants, ensuring their availability for future generations and promoting the fusion of traditional and modern healthcare systems.

Availability of data and materials

All the information gathered for this research was examined, interpreted, and incorporated into this paper, with supplementary materials provided as Supplementary files 1.

Abbreviations

Analysis of variance

Central Statistical Agency of Ethiopia

Fidelity level

Global positioning system

Invasive alien species

Informant consensus factor

Indigenous knowledge

Mizan-Tepi University

Plant part value

Traditional medicinal plants knowledge

• Traditional medicinal plants

World Health Organization. WHO global report on traditional and complementary medicine 2019. World Health Organization; 2019 May 16.

Kassa Z, Asfaw Z, Demissew S. An ethnobotanical study of medicinal plants in sheka zone of southern nations nationalities and peoples regional state Ethiopia. J Ethnobiol Ethnomed. 2020;16:1–5.

Article   Google Scholar  

Tolossa K, Debela E, Athanasiadou S, Tolera A, Ganga G, Houdijk JG. Ethno-medicinal study of plants used for treatment of human and livestock ailments by traditional healers in South Omo, Southern Ethiopia. J Ethnobiol Ethnomed. 2013;9:1–5.

Dubale S, Kebebe D, Zeynudin A, Abdissa N, Suleman S. Phytochemical screening and antimicrobial activity evaluation of selected medicinal plants in Ethiopia. J Exp Pharmacol. 2023;31:51–62.

Bhat SG. Medicinal plants and its pharmacological values. Nat Med Plants. 2021;20(12):217–28.

Google Scholar  

Mahwasane ST, Middleton L, Boaduo N. An ethnobotanical survey of indigenous knowledge on medicinal plants used by the traditional healers of the Lwamondo area, Limpopo province, South Africa. S Afr J Bot. 2013;1(88):69–75.

Asiimwe S, Namukobe J, Byamukama R, Imalingat B. Ethnobotanical survey of medicinal plant species used by communities around Mabira and Mpanga Central Forest Reserves, Uganda. Trop Med Health. 2021;49(1):52.

Article   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Haile AA. Ethnobotanical study of medicinal plants used by local people of mojana wadera woreda, north shewa zone, amhara region, Ethiopia. Asian J Ethnobiol. 2022. https://doi.org/10.13057/asianjethnobiol/y050104 .

Jima TT, Megersa M. Ethnobotanical study of medicinal plants used to treat human diseases in Berbere District, Bale Zone of Oromia Regional State, South East Ethiopia. Evid-Based Complement Altern Med. 2018;2018(1):8602945.

CSA. Federal Demographic Republic of Population Projection of Ethiopia from 2014 to 2017: Population Projection of Ethiopia for All Regions at Woreda Level from 2014–2017. Cent Stat Agency. 2017; 1–118.

Chekole G. Ethnobotanical study of medicinal plants used against human ailments in Gubalafto District, Northern Ethiopia. J Ethnobiol Ethnomed. 2017;13:1–29.

Martin GJ. Ethnobotany: a methods manual. Routledge; 2010. p. 23.

Book   Google Scholar  

Bekele M, Woldeyes F, Lulekal E, Bekele T, Demissew S. Ethnobotanical investigation of medicinal plants in Buska Mountain range, Hamar district, Southwestern Ethiopia. J Ethnobiol Ethnomed. 2022;18(1):1–26.

Dulal K, Chaudhary S, Uprety Y, Shrestha N, Shakya S, Munankarmi N. Ethnomedicinal plants used by the local people of Changunarayan Municipality, Bhaktapur Nepal. Ethnobot Res Appl. 2022;22(23):1–27.

Chekole G, Asfaw Z, Kelbessa E. Ethnobotanical study of medicinal plants in the environs of Tara-gedam and Amba remnant forests of Libo Kemkem District, northwest Ethiopia. J Ethnobiol Ethnomed. 2015;11:1–38.

Höft M, Barik SK, Lykke AM. Quantitative ethnobotany: Application of multivariate and statistical analysis in ethnobotany. People and Plants working paper. 1999; 6

Avocèvou C, Sinsin B, Oumorou M, Dossou G, Donkpègan A. Ethnobotany of Pentadesma butyracea in Benin: a quantitative approach. InProccedings of the conference, Traditional forest-related knowledge and sustainable forest management in Africa, October 15–17, 2008, Accra, Ghana, IUFRO 2009 (pp. 154–164).

Cotton CM. Ethnobotany: principles and applications. 1996 4.

Heinrich M, Ankli A, Frei B, Weimann C, Sticher O. Medicinal plants in Mexico: Healers’ consensus and cultural importance. Soc Sci Med. 1998;47(11):1859–71.

Article   CAS   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Alexiades MN. Alexiades. Collecting Ethnobotanical Data. 1996.

Paulos B, Fenta TG, Bisrat D, Asres K. Health seeking behavior and use of medicinal plants among the Hamer ethnic group, South Omo zone, southwestern Ethiopia. J Ethnobiol Ethnomed. 2016;12:1–3.

Belachew Garedew BG, Dagne Abebe DA. Ethnomedicinal plants used for the treatment of gastrointestinal parasitic diseases in human in Yeki district, southwest Ethiopia

Gonfa N, Tulu D, Hundera K, Raga D. Ethnobotanical study of medicinal plants, its utilization, and conservation by indigenous people of Gera district, Ethiopia. Cogent Food Agric. 2020;6(1):1852716.

Geta O, Hansha H, Asafa O, Amde A. Ethnobotanical study of medicinal plants in ale woreda South West Ethiopia. J Med Plants. 2020;8(5):121–9.

Kindie B, Tamiru C. Assessment of traditional medicinal plant Ethnomedicinal value and its sustainable conservation Status used by indigenous people to treat different ailments in Babile District, Oromia Region, Ethiopia 6, 6. J Biol Med. 2021;6(3):101–6.

Ma Y, Liu D, Cheng H, Bussmann RW, He H, Guo Z, Liu B. Ethnobotanical study of medicinal plants used by Miao people in Jijiezi, Yunnan China. Ethnobot Res Appl. 2019;10(18):1–4.

Mwingira FW, Matiya DJ, Mogha NG. Ethnobotanical survey on the knowledge and use of medicinal plants for malaria management among university students Tanzania. J Sci. 2023;49(3):656–66.

Liaqat I, Hussain S, Abid H, Ahmad I, Arif S, Ul Haq MA, Shaikh FP, Matee-Ur-Rehman H, Mahmood B. An ethnobotanical survey of medicinal plants used for primary health care from Patan Sher Khan and surrounding areas of district Sudhnoti, Azad Jammu and Kashmir, Pakistan. J Appl Res Plant Sci. 2023;4(01):518–28.

Tassew G. Ethnobotanical study of medicinal plants in Borecha woreda, Buno Bedele zone southwestern Ethiopia. Int J Sci Res. 2019;8(9):1484–98.

Abebe BA, Chane Teferi S. Ethnobotanical study of medicinal plants used to treat human and livestock ailments in hulet eju enese woreda, east gojjam zone of amhara region Ethiopia. Evid-based Complement Altern Med. 2021;2021:6668541.

Tahir M, Asnake H, Beyene T, Van Damme P, Mohammed A. Ethnobotanical study of medicinal plants in Asagirt District, Northeastern Ethiopia. Trop Med Health. 2023;51(1):1.

Biya A, Raga D, Denu D. Ethnobotanical study of medicinal plants in Dedo district, Jimma zone, Southwest Ethiopia. J Med Plants Stud. 2017;5:90–5.

Tefera BN, Kim YD. Ethnobotanical study of medicinal plants in the Hawassa Zuria District, Sidama zone, Southern Ethiopia. J Ethnobiol Ethnomed. 2019;15:1–21.

Agize M, Asfaw Z, Nemomissa S, Gebre T. Ethnobotany of traditional medicinal plants and associated indigenous knowledge in Dawuro Zone of Southwestern Ethiopia. J Ethnobiol Ethnomed. 2022;18(1):48.

Desalegn A, Egigu MC, Sasikumar JM. Ethnobotanical study on medicinal plants used by ethnic people of Gechi District, South West Oromi Ethiopia. Nusantara Bioscience. 2022. https://doi.org/10.13057/nusbiosci/n140113 .

Mesfin T, Abebe W. An ethno-botanical study of medicinal plants in Dilla Zuria Woreda of Gedo Zone Southern Ethiopia. Glob J Ecol. 2022;7(1):001–12.

Malik K, Ahmad M, Zafar M, Ullah R, Mahmood HM, Parveen B, Rashid N, Sultana S, Shah SN, Lubna. An ethnobotanical study of medicinal plants used to treat skin diseases in northern Pakistan. BMC Complement Altern Med. 2019;19:1–38.

Liu S, Zhang B, Lei Q, Zhou J, Ali M, Long C. Diversity and traditional knowledge of medicinal plants used by Shui people in Southwest China. J Ethnobiol Ethnomed. 2023;19(1):20.

Ali E, Azhar MF, Bussmann RW. Ethnobotanical inventory and medicinal applications of plants used by the local people of Cholistan desert Pakistan. Ethnobot Res Appl. 2023;21:25.

Meragiaw M, Asfaw Z, Argaw M. The status of ethnobotanical knowledge of medicinal plants and the impacts of resettlement in Delanta, northwestern Wello, northern Ethiopia. Evid-Based Complement Altern Med. 2016;2016(1):5060247.

Amsalu N, Regassa R. Ethnobotanical study of medicinal plants in and around Aba-Asrat Monastery following Chemoga River, east Gojjam zone, northwestern Ethiopia.

Navia ZI, Adnan A, Harmawan T, Suwardi AB. Ethnobotanical study of wild medicinal plants in Serbajadi protected forest of East Aceh District Indonesia. Biodiversitas J Biol Divers. 2022. https://doi.org/10.13057/biodiv/d231001 .

Asnake S, Teklehaymanot T, Hymete A, Erko B, Giday M. Survey of medicinal plants used to treat malaria by Sidama People of Boricha District, Sidama Zone, South Region of Ethiopia. Evid-Based Complement Altern Med. 2016;2016(1):9690164.

Megenase JA, Gelaye KT, Dara PK. Indigenous knowledge and practices on medicinal plants used by local communities of Gambella Region, South West Ethiopia. Int J Trop Dis Health. 2019;39(2):1–4.

Osman A, Sbhatu DB, Giday M. Medicinal plants used to manage human and livestock ailments in Raya Kobo District of Amhara Regional State, Ethiopia. Evid-Based Complement Altern Med. 2020;2020(1):1329170.

Mutie FM, Gao LL, Kathambi V, Rono PC, Musili PM, Ngugi G, Hu GW, Wang QF. An ethnobotanical survey of a dryland botanical garden and its environs in Kenya: the Mutomo hill plant sanctuary. Evid-Based Complement Altern Med. 2020;2020(1):1543831.

Laldingliani TB, Thangjam NM, Zomuanawma R, Bawitlung L, Pal A, Kumar A. Ethnomedicinal study of medicinal plants used by Mizo tribes in Champhai district of Mizoram, India. J Ethnobiol Ethnomed. 2022;18(1):22.

Article   CAS   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Eisawi KAE, Gibreel HH, He H, Shaheen T, Abdalla OM, Yasin EHE. Ethnobotanical study of medicinal trees and shrubs from the Rashad district of Southern Kordofan. Sudan. 2022;62(2):337–57.

Sikuku L, Njoroge B, Suba V, Achieng E, Mbogo J, Li Y. Ethnobotany and quantitative analysis of medicinal plants used by the people of Malava sub-county Western Kenya. Ethnobot Res Appl. 2023;25(26):1–20.

Essandoh PK, Dali GL, Bryant IM. Medicinal plant use and integration of traditional healers into health care system: A case study at Ankasa Forest Reserve and catchment communities in Ghana. Ethnobot Res Appl. 2023;24(26):1–24.

Evbuomwan IO, Stephen Adeyemi O, Oluba OM. Indigenous medicinal plants used in folk medicine for malaria treatment in Kwara State, Nigeria: an ethnobotanical study. BMC Complement Med Ther. 2023;23(1):324.

Muhakr MA, Ahmed IM, El Hassan GO, Yagi S. Ethnobotanical study on medicinal plants in Melit area (North Darfur), Western Sudan. J Ethnobiol Ethnomed. 2024;20(1):3.

Mekuanent T, Zebene A, Solomon Z. Ethnobotanical study of medicinal plants in Chilga district, Northwestern Ethiopia. J Nat Remed. 2015;9:88–112.

Duguma IO, Mesele MA. Use and management of medicinal plants by indigenous people in Boji Dirmeji District Western Ethiopia Ghana. J Sci. 2019;60(1):37–49.

Woldemariam G, Demissew S, Asfaw Z. An ethnobotanical study of traditional medicinal plants used for human ailments in Yem ethnic group, south Ethiopia. Ethnobot Res Appl. 2021;8(22):1–5.

Yimam M, Yimer SM, Beressa TB. Ethnobotanical study of medicinal plants used in Artuma Fursi district, Amhara Regional State, Ethiopia. Trop Med Health. 2022;50(1):85.

Bogale M, Sasikumar JM, Egigu MC. An ethnomedicinal study in tulo district, west hararghe zone, oromia region, Ethiopia. Heliyon. 2023;9(4):e15361.

Zhou H, Zhang J, Kirbis BS, Mula Z, Zhang W, Kuang Y, Huang Q, Yin L. Ethnobotanical study on medicinal plants used by Bulang people in Yunnan, China. J Ethnobiol Ethnomed. 2023;19(1):38.

Nguyen TS, Xia NH, Van Chu T, Van Sam H. Ethnobotanical study on medicinal plants in traditional markets of Son La province Vietnam. Forest Soc. 2019;3(2):171–92.

Khajuria AK, Manhas RK, Kumar H, Bisht NS. Ethnobotanical study of traditionally used medicinal plants of Pauri district of Uttarakhand, India. J Ethnopharmacol. 2021;10(276): 114204.

Gang R, Matsabisa M, Okello D, Kang Y. Ethnomedicine and ethnopharmacology of medicinal plants used in the treatment of diabetes mellitus in Uganda. Appl Biol Chem. 2023;66(1):39.

Ralte L, Sailo H, Singh YT. Ethnobotanical study of medicinal plants used by the indigenous community of the western region of Mizoram, India. J Ethnobiol Ethnomed. 2024;20(1):2.

Tuasha N, Petros B, Asfaw Z. Medicinal plants used by traditional healers to treat malignancies and other human ailments in Dalle District, Sidama Zone Ethiopia. J Ethnobiol Ethnomed. 2018;14:1–21.

Hussain M, Alam J, Shah GM, Gul A, Majid A, Shafqat N, Khan SM. Assessment of traditional knowledge of medicinal plants practiced by rural communities residing around Musk Deer National Park, Kashmir Himalaya Pakistan. Ethnobot Res Appl. 2024;1(28):1–23.

Mwaura A, Kamau J, Ombori O. An ethnobotanical study of medicinal plants commonly traded in Kajiado, Narok and Nairobi counties, Kenya: Medicinal Plant Species Traded in Kenya. East African J Sci Technol Innov. 2020. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13002-020-00387-z .

Hu R, Lin C, Xu W, Liu Y, Long C. Ethnobotanical study on medicinal plants used by Mulam people in Guangxi China. J Ethnobiol Ethnomed. 2020. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13002-020-00387-z .

Bai Y, Zhang Q, He X, Wang H, Li W, Zhu J, Meng Y, Long C. An ethnobotanical study on medicinal plants of Shexian dryland stone terraced system in northern China. J Ethnobiol Ethnomed. 2022;18(1):62.

Lu Z, Chen H, Lin C, Ou G, Li J, Xu W. Ethnobotany of medicinal plants used by the Yao people in Gongcheng County, Guangxi, China. J Ethnobiol Ethnomed. 2022;18(1):49.

Gemechu EC. Assessment of indigenous knowledge of medicinal plants used for livestock treatment in five selected kebeles of Kersa district, Jimma zone, South Western Ethiopia. J Sci Agric. 2021;5:49–54.

Regassa R, Bekele T, Megersa M. Ethnobotanical study of traditional medicinal plants used to treat human ailments by Halaba people, southern Ethiopia. J Med Plants Stud. 2017;5(4):36–47.

Woldearegay M, Regassa A. Ethnobotanical study of traditional medicinal plants in Jardega Jarte district, Horo Guduru Wollega Zone, Oromia Regional State, Western Ethiopia. Sustainable Systems. 2023. https://doi.org/10.59411/9vvynp02 .

Megersa M, Nedi T, Belachew S. Ethnobotanical study of medicinal plants used against human diseases in Zuway Dugda District, Ethiopia. Evid-Based Complement Altern Med. 2023;2023(1):5545294.

Odongo E, Mungai N, Mutai P, Karumi E, Mwangi J, Omale J. Ethnobotanical survey of the medicinal plants used in Kakamega County, Western Kenya. Appl Med Res. 2018;4(1):22.

Panmei R, Gajurel PR, Singh B. Ethnobotany of medicinal plants used by the Zeliangrong ethnic group of Manipur, northeast India. J Ethnopharmacol. 2019;10(235):164–82.

Hansha H, Fitamo D, Assefa O. Ethnobotanical study of medicinal plants in Burji Woreda, Southern Ethiopia. Int J Sci Res Multidiscip Stud. 2020;6(8):39–48.

Mengesha GG. Ethnobotanical survey of medicinal plants used in treating human and livestock health problems in Mandura Woreda of Benishangul Gumuz Ethiopia. Adv Med Plant Res. 2016;4(1):11–26.

CAS   Google Scholar  

Tahir M, Gebremichael L, Beyene T, Van Damme P. Ethnobotanical study of medicinal plants in Adwa district, central zone of Tigray regional state, northern Ethiopia. J Ethnobiol Ethnomed. 2021;17:1–3.

Karki S, Dhital AP, Uprety Y, Ghimire SK. Medicinal plants and their use by an ethnic minority Jirel in Dolakha district Central Nepal. Ethnobot Res Appl. 2023;16(25):1–29.

Alemneh D. Ethnobotanical study of plants used for human ailments in Yilmana densa and Quarit districts of west Gojjam Zone, Amhara region, Ethiopia. Biomed Res Int. 2021;2021(1):6615666.

PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Kindie B, Tamiru C, Abdala T. Ethnobotanical study of medicinal plants and conservation status used to treat human and livestock ailments in Fadis District, Eastern Ethiopia. Int J Homeopath Nat Med. 2021;7(1):7–17.

Garedew B, Abebe D. Research article ethnobotanical study of medicinal plants used for treatment of liver diseases in Tepi Town Southwest Ethiopia. Asian J Biol Sci. 2019;12(4):648–55.

Mekonnen AB, Mohammed AS, Tefera AK. Ethnobotanical study of traditional medicinal plants used to treat human and animal diseases in Sedie Muja District, South Gondar, Ethiopia. Evid-Based Complement Altern Med. 2022;2022(1):7328613.

Bose BT, Melka Y, Awas T. Ethnobotanical Study of Medicinal Plants in Hidabu Abote District, North Shewa Zone, Oromia Region, Ethiopia.

Birhan YS, Kitaw SL, Alemayehu YA, Mengesha NM. Ethnobotanical study of medicinal plants used to treat human diseases in Enarj Enawga district, East Gojjam zone, Amhara region Ethiopia. SM J Med Plant Stud. 2017;1(1):1–9.

Amsalu N, Bezie Y, Fentahun M, Alemayehu A, Amsalu G. Use and conservation of medicinal plants by indigenous people of Gozamin Wereda, East Gojjam Zone of Amhara region, Ethiopia: an ethnobotanical approach. Evid-Based Complement Altern Med. 2018;2018(1):2973513.

Wubetu M, Abula T, Dejenu G. Ethnopharmacologic survey of medicinal plants used to treat human diseases by traditional medical practitioners in Dega Damot district, Amhara Northwestern Ethiopia. BMC Res notes. 2017;10:1–3.

Asfaw A, Lulekal E, Bekele T, Debella A, Debebe E, Sisay B. Medicinal plants used to treat livestock ailments in Ensaro district, North Shewa Zone, Amhara regional state, Ethiopia. BMC Vet Res. 2022;18(1):235.

Morka AB, Duressa TR. Te use and management of medicinal plant by Shenasha people in Dibati District North West Ethiopia. J Dis Med Plants. 2021;7(3):61–81.

Teshome M, Kebede F, Yohannes T. An ethnobotanical survey of indigenous knowledge on medicinal plants used by communities to treat various diseases around Ensaro District, North Shewa Zone of Amhara Regional State, Ethiopia. Scientifica. 2023;2023(1):5575405.

Alemu M, Asfaw Z, Lulekal E, Warkineh B, Debella A, Sisay B, Debebe E. Ethnobotanical study of traditional medicinal plants used by the local people in Habru District, North Wollo Zone, Ethiopia. J Ethnobiol Ethnomed. 2024;20(1):4.

Assen Y, Woldearegay M, Haile A. An ethnobotanical study of medicinal plants in Kelala District, South Wollo zone of Amhara region, Northeastern Ethiopia. Evidence-based Complement Altern Med. 2021;2021(1):6651922.

Tadesse T, Teka A. Ethnobotanical Study on Medicinal Plants Used by the Local Communities of Ameya District, Oromia Regional State, Ethiopia. Evidence-based Complement Altern Med. 2023;2023(1):5961067.

Chekole G, Kassa GM. Ethnobotanical Study on Medicinal Plant Species Uses against Human Ailments in Lay Armachiho District , Northwest Ethiopia Ethnobotanical Study on Medicinal Plant Species Uses against Human Ailments in Lay Armachiho District , Northwest Ethiopia. 2023;(December).

Guzo S, Lulekal E, Nemomissa S. Ethnobotanical study of underutilized wild edible plants and threats to their long-term existence in Midakegn District, West Shewa Zone, Central Ethiopia. J Ethnobiol Ethnomed. 2023;19(1):30.

Megersa MO, Woldetsadik S. Ethnobotanical study of medicinal plants used by local communities of Damot Woyde district, Wolaita zone, southern Ethiopia. Nusantara Bioscience. 2022 14(1).

Abdela G, Sultan M. Indigenous knowledge, major threats and conservation practices of medicinal plants by local community in Heban Arsi District, Oromia, South Eastern Ethiopia. Adv Life Sci Technol. 2018;68(10):8–26.

Mosissa D, Atinafu H. Applied ethnobotany: People, medicinal plants use and conservation practices in Benishangul Gumuz Regional State of Ethiopia: the future cursed natural resource in the Region. Int J Pharma Sci. 2021;1(1):18–30.

Girma Z, Abdela G, Awas T. Ethnobotanical study of medicinal plant species in Nensebo District, south-eastern Ethiopia. Ethnobot Res Appl. 2022;27(24):1–25.

Woldeamanuel MM, Geda MK, Mohapatra S, Bastia TK, Rath P, Panda AK. Ethnobotanical study of endemic and non-endemic medicinal plants used by indigenous people in environs of Gullele botanical garden Addis Ababa, central Ethiopia: a major focus on Asteraceae family. Front Pharmacol. 2022;23(13):1020097.

Tamene S, Negash M, Makonda FB, Chiwona-Karltun L, Kibret KS. Ethnobotanical study on medicinal plant knowledge among three ethnic groups in peri-urban areas of south-central Ethiopia. J Ethnobiol Ethnomed. 2023;19(1):55.

Kidane L, Gebremedhin G, Beyene T. Ethnobotanical study of medicinal plants in ganta afeshum district, eastern zone of tigray, northern Ethiopia. J Ethnobiol Ethnomed. 2018;14:1–9.

Usman KA, Egigu MC, Mahalingam JS. Ethnobotanical study on traditional medicinal plants used by Oromo ethnic people of Goro district, Bale zone of Oromia region Ethiopia. Ethnobot Res Appl. 2022;26(24):1–21.

Silambarasan R, Sasidharan S, Kumar N, Aravind R, Nair AS, Selavinayagam KT. A multivariate and quantitative assessment of medicinal plants used by the indigenous Malayali tribes in the Javadhu hills of Tiruvannamalai district, Tamil Nadu, India. Heliyon. 2023 9(5)

Gnahore E, Kouadio KR, Amba AJ, Kone M, Bakayoko A. Ethnobotanical survey of plants used by the riparian population of Banco National Park (Abidjan, Ivory Coast). Asian J Ethnobiol. 2022. https://doi.org/10.13057/asianjethnobiol/y050205 .

Abera B. Medicinal plants used in traditional medicine by Oromo people, Ghimbi District, Southwest Ethiopia. J Ethnobiol Ethnomed. 2014;10:1–5.

Tafesse T, Temesgen A, Amenu D. Ethnobotanical Study of Medicinal Plants in Gidda Ayana, East Wollega Zone of Oromia Region, Western Ethiopia. Int J Adv Res Biol Sci. 2022;9(8):16–31.

Kefalew A, Sintayehu S. Transference of ethnobotanical knowledge and threat & conservation status of medicinal plants in Ethiopia: anthropological and ethnobotanical perspectives. Journal of Archaeology & Anthropology. 2017;1:15–9.

Kindie B, Mengistu S. Ethnobotanical study of medicinal plant and traditional knowledge used. J Tradit Med Clin Naturopathy. 2023;12(6):403.

Gebru MG, Lulekal E, Bekele T, Demissew S. Use and management practices of medicinal plants in and around mixed woodland vegetation, Tigray Regional State Northern Ethiopia. Ethnobot Res Appl. 2021;14(21):1–26.

Nega S, Jerena A, Boja M. Conservation threats to ethnomedicinal plants in Kore District, South Eastern, Ethiopia. J Plant Sci Phytopathol. 2023;7(2):069–75.

Kassa Z, Asfaw Z, Demissew S. Ethnobotanical Study of Medicinal Plants Used by the Local People of Akaki District, East Shewa Zone, Oromia Regional State Ethiopia. J Med Plants Stud. 2017;4(2):1–78.

Shiferaw W, Demissew S, Bekele T. Invasive alien plant species in Ethiopia: ecological impacts on biodiversity a review paper. Int J Mol Biol. 2018;3(4):171–8.

Abrha HK, Gerima YG, Gebreegziabher ST. Indigenous Knowledge of Local Communities in Utilization of Ethnoveterinary Medicinal Plants and Their Conservation Status in Dess’a Priority Forest, North Eastern Escarpment of Ethiopia.

Ayalew H, Tewelde E, Abebe B, Alebachew Y, Tadesse S. Endemic medicinal plants of Ethiopia: ethnomedicinal uses, biological activities and chemical constituents. J Ethnopharmacol. 2022;15(293): 115307.

Ssenku JE, Okurut SA, Namuli A, Kudamba A, Tugume P, Matovu P, Wasige G, Kafeero HM, Walusansa A. Medicinal plant use, conservation, and the associated traditional knowledge in rural communities in Eastern Uganda. Trop Med Health. 2022;50(1):39.

Download references

Acknowledgements

I am grateful to the people of Guraferda District, particularly the traditional healers, for sharing their knowledge of medicinal plants and being hospitable during my research in the area. I also want to thank Mizan-Tepi University for helping to my fieldwork. Additionally, I appreciate the information provided by the administrative head of Guraferda District, as well as experts at the District's Agriculture and Rural Development Office, Health Office, and Tourism and Culture Office.

No funding.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Department of Biology, Mizan-Tepi University, Tepi, Ethiopia

Ashebir Awoke, Girma Gudesho & Fetku Akmel

Department of Mathematics, Mizan-Tepi University, Tepi, Ethiopia

P. Shanmugasundaram

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

All authors have made significant contributions to this original research, Ashebir Awoke performed the data collection and formal analysis, Girma Gudesho helped in reviewing and editing the technique, manuscript, and botanical name identification, Fetku Akmel editing the language, and Dr. P.Shanmugasundaram verified the data analysis. All authors have reviewed and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ashebir Awoke .

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate.

Prior to data collection, permission letters were acquired from the Guraferda District Administration Offices. Informants were verbally consented before interviews and group discussions, and their data were recorded with their permission. Furthermore, consent was obtained from the informants to publish the individual data collected from them.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interests

The authors state that they do not have any conflicts of interest.

Additional information

Publisher's note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License, which permits any non-commercial use, sharing, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if you modified the licensed material. You do not have permission under this licence to share adapted material derived from this article or parts of it. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ .

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Awoke, A., Gudesho, G., Akmel, F. et al. Traditionally used medicinal plants for human ailments and their threats in Guraferda District, Benchi-Sheko zone, Southwest Ethiopia. J Ethnobiology Ethnomedicine 20 , 82 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1186/s13002-024-00709-5

Download citation

Received : 17 April 2024

Accepted : 11 July 2024

Published : 02 September 2024

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1186/s13002-024-00709-5

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Ethnobotany

Journal of Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine

ISSN: 1746-4269

• General enquiries: [email protected]

The Importance of Research About Research on Culture: A Call for Meta-research on Culture

• Social and Family Dynamics, T. Denny Sanford School of (SSFD)

Research output : Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

Objectives: It is crucial to examine how research on culture is fueled by assumptions, policies, and practices. The goal of this article is to promote meta-research on culture, the critical study of how investigations on culture are performed and interpreted, howscientific knowledge about culture is produced and transmitted, and the importance of scrutinizing assumptions, policies, and practices in a way that challenge views of minoritized groups as deviant and pathological. Method: We define key concepts, such as meta-research, culture, and meta-research on culture. Results: We approach cultural research as a system of people (researchers, participants), places (academic institutions, journals), practices (sampling, comparing groups), and power (legitimizing some groups as normative and others as deviant). We discuss assumptions, policies, and practices, and review landmark studies and methods. Conclusions: Meta-research on culture is an emerging field that can improve scientific understanding of human culture, guide efforts to elevate the perspectives of people who have historically experienced marginalization, inform institutional support and the creation of nurturing academic spaces, and guide the implementation of better research and training practices.

• Meta-research
• Meta-research on culture

ASJC Scopus subject areas

• Social Psychology
• Sociology and Political Science

Access to Document

• 10.1037/cdp0000516

Other files and links

• Link to publication in Scopus

Fingerprint

• Social Exclusion Social Sciences 100%
• Cultural Research Social Sciences 100%
• Meta-research Keyphrases 100%
• Journal Practice Keyphrases 20%

T1 - The Importance of Research About Research on Culture

T2 - A Call for Meta-research on Culture

AU - Causadias, José M.

AU - Korous, Kevin M.

AU - Cahill, Karina M.

AU - Rea-Sandin, Gianna

N1 - Funding Information: This research did not receive any specific grant from funding agencies in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors. We declare no conflict of interest. Kevin M. Korous is now at the Department of Family and Preventive Medicine, University of Utah School of Medicine. Publisher Copyright: © 2021. American Psychological Association

N2 - Objectives: It is crucial to examine how research on culture is fueled by assumptions, policies, and practices. The goal of this article is to promote meta-research on culture, the critical study of how investigations on culture are performed and interpreted, howscientific knowledge about culture is produced and transmitted, and the importance of scrutinizing assumptions, policies, and practices in a way that challenge views of minoritized groups as deviant and pathological. Method: We define key concepts, such as meta-research, culture, and meta-research on culture. Results: We approach cultural research as a system of people (researchers, participants), places (academic institutions, journals), practices (sampling, comparing groups), and power (legitimizing some groups as normative and others as deviant). We discuss assumptions, policies, and practices, and review landmark studies and methods. Conclusions: Meta-research on culture is an emerging field that can improve scientific understanding of human culture, guide efforts to elevate the perspectives of people who have historically experienced marginalization, inform institutional support and the creation of nurturing academic spaces, and guide the implementation of better research and training practices.

AB - Objectives: It is crucial to examine how research on culture is fueled by assumptions, policies, and practices. The goal of this article is to promote meta-research on culture, the critical study of how investigations on culture are performed and interpreted, howscientific knowledge about culture is produced and transmitted, and the importance of scrutinizing assumptions, policies, and practices in a way that challenge views of minoritized groups as deviant and pathological. Method: We define key concepts, such as meta-research, culture, and meta-research on culture. Results: We approach cultural research as a system of people (researchers, participants), places (academic institutions, journals), practices (sampling, comparing groups), and power (legitimizing some groups as normative and others as deviant). We discuss assumptions, policies, and practices, and review landmark studies and methods. Conclusions: Meta-research on culture is an emerging field that can improve scientific understanding of human culture, guide efforts to elevate the perspectives of people who have historically experienced marginalization, inform institutional support and the creation of nurturing academic spaces, and guide the implementation of better research and training practices.

KW - Culture

KW - Meta-research

KW - Meta-research on culture

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85123199923&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85123199923&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1037/cdp0000516

DO - 10.1037/cdp0000516

M3 - Article

C2 - 34968094

AN - SCOPUS:85123199923

SN - 1099-9809

JO - Cultural Diversity and Ethnic Minority Psychology

JF - Cultural Diversity and Ethnic Minority Psychology

• Skip to main content

We use cookies

Necessary cookies.

Necessary cookies enable core functionality. The website cannot function properly without these cookies, and can only be disabled by changing your browser preferences.

Analytics cookies

Analytical cookies help us improve our website. We use Google Analytics. All data is anonymised.

Clarity helps us to understand our users’ behaviour by visually representing their clicks, taps and scrolling. All data is anonymised.

Privacy policy

• School of Culture & Creative Arts
• Art History Research
• Kelvin Centre for Conservation and Cultural Heritage Research
• News and Events
• Textile Conservation
• Technical Art History
• Dress and Textile Histories
• Our Postgraduate Students

TCC@50 Conference at the Kelvin Centre

Published: 3 September 2024

Join us to celebrate and challenge the diversity, maturity and creativity of textile conservation

TCC@50 - Building on 50 Years of Training, Practice and Research

We are delighted to announce the call for papers is now open for the TCC@50 conference to be held at the Kelvin Centre on Monday 16th to Tuesday 17th June 2025.

2025 marks the 50th anniversary of the establishment of the Textile Conservation Centre at Hampton Court Palace. Whilst its physical location and name have changed, its core aim has remained the same: to educate textile conservators in a dynamic and professional teaching, practice and research environment.

Using this significant milestone as a launching point, the conference seeks to celebrate and challenge the diversity, maturity and creativity of our profession. We will explore the many facets of the profession, looking to the future whilst also responding to the legacy of the past and exploring our relationship with others.

The 2-day conference will comprise presentations, posters and round table discussions, as well as social events and an opportunity to network with fellow professionals.

Conference Topics

We invite authors at all stages of their career and from all relevant backgrounds and training contexts to contribute papers which explore the following themes:

• Looking Forwards - the future of the discipline and the profession, addressing the changing needs, responsibilities and challenges of the sector.
• Building, Adapting, Sharing - evolving techniques and approaches, drawing influence and inspiration from other conservation fields, other disciplines and other traditions.
• Reflections and Responses - paradigm shifts in 50 years of textile conservation practice and training.

Projects already presented or published will not be considered and proposed projects must be completed by the end of 2024. The publication of conference post- prints is anticipated.

A Hybrid Event

The conference will take place in Glasgow and will be run as a hybrid event. In-person presentations are preferred, but online delivery will also be considered.

Guide for Authors

The conference is planning to deliver a mix of long (20 minutes), short (5 minutes) and poster presentations.

Abstracts should have the following format:

• Author(s) – indicate corresponding author with *
• Abstract text (a maximum of 300 words, which should address at least one of the themes, and include the key points and conclusions covered in your paper)
• Presentation type (20 minute oral/5 minute oral/poster, in-person/remote)
• Author biography (a maximum of 100 words per author)
• Contact details of corresponding author (email address)

The abstract should be submitted as a Word document; the file name should include the surname of the main author (e.g., Foskett_TTC50.doc).

The abstract should not include images or attachments. Abstracts should be submitted to: [email protected]

Important Dates

Deadline for submission: 31st October 2024 Notification of acceptance: 22nd November 2024

For any conference enquiries: [email protected]

First published: 3 September 2024

<< News and Events

in this issue

next story >>

Internet Explorer lacks support for the features of this website. For the best experience, please use a modern browser such as Chrome, Firefox, or Edge.

Community Partners Respond to Hawaiʻi Island Cetacean Strandings

August 28, 2024

NOAA Fisheries and the Native Hawaiian Organization Kiaʻi Kanaloa are developing a new partnership for whale and dolphin stranding responses on Hawaiʻi Island.

Two cetacean strandings on Hawaiʻi Island this summer heralded an important and developing partnership between NOAA Fisheries and the Native Hawaiian Organization Kiaʻi Kanaloa. Kiaʻi Kanaloa is a multi-island network of Hawaiian cultural practitioners who care for marine animals. We're working with Kiaʻi Kanaloa to develop the Native Hawaiian Organization as a lead responder for cetacean strandings on Hawaiʻi Island.

The partnership is under the umbrella of  NOAA Fisheries’ Marine Mammal Health and Stranding Program . It builds on long-standing efforts across the state acknowledging the importance of cetaceans in Native Hawaiian culture.

While this partnership is growing, it already has shown great potential during the strandings of a  Kogia (pygmy or dwarf sperm whale) calf and a  spinner dolphin in July.

Palaoa Stranding at Kaʻiliwai

On July 14, 2024, members of the Leleiwi community alerted Kiaʻi Kanaloa that a small palaoa (whale) stranded alive at Kaʻiliwai, a small bay in Hilo. Kiaʻi Kanaloa then contacted us to coordinate response.  Kogia live in deep, offshore water, so finding one nearshore is abnormal. This  Kogia was a calf and had no mother anywhere in sight, which is also not normal. Dolphin and whale calves cannot survive without their mother’s care and milk during the early period of their lives. This calf appeared weak and had multiple scratches, likely from scraping against rocks along the shoreline.

When a dolphin or whale strands, the animal is stressed and most likely sick or injured. The most important thing people can do is give it plenty of space and contact trained and authorized responders.

Kiaʻi Kanaloa guided and worked with members of the Leleiwi and Keaukaha communities to respond to this stranding. Hui Hoʻoleimaluō, who are kiaʻi (caretakers) of the area, worked with personnel from the State of Hawai‘i Department of Land and Natural Resources and the County of Hawaiʻi Ocean Safety. They ensured the  Kogia  was given a protected space free of human-caused stressors. The calf passed away naturally soon thereafter.

Kiaʻi Kanaloa and Hui Hoʻoleimaluō members then conducted an external examination. Following NOAA guidelines, they provided us with important scientific information about the stranding. The data will be entered into NOAA’s national stranding database so the broader community of stranding responders can learn from patterns of strandings over time. They also held a discussion with the University of Hawaiʻi Health and Stranding Lab regarding additional post-mortem examination procedures. In consideration of requests expressed by members of the Native Hawaiian community, a necropsy was not performed in this case. Kiaʻi Kanaloa and Hui Hoʻoleimaluō members conducted additional rituals and a burial at sea after collecting the stranding data.

Naiʻa Stranding at Laʻaloa Bay

Just a week prior, on July 9, Kiaʻi Kanaloa also led the response and external examination of a nai‘a. It had stranded live on the rocks and died soon after at Laʻaloa Bay in Kona. Members of Kiaʻi Kanaloa worked with a University of Hawaiʻi Health and Stranding Lab volunteer to collect blood and a tissue sample. The Lab will use them to screen for diseases of concern in local dolphin populations. Kia‘i Kanaloa then gave the dolphin a burial at sea.

Both strandings took the support of many partners, and we are grateful for joint efforts. We look forward to continuing cetacean response training with local kiaʻi. This collaborative effort honors Hawaiian science and Western science, while recognizing the important insights cetaceans provide on the state of our nearshore and deep sea waters.

More Information

• Cetacean Strandings in the Pacific Islands
• Report a Stranded or Injured Marine Animal

Recent News

Celebrating national intern day at noaa fisheries.

From Overfished to Sustainable Harvests: Pacific Bluefin Tuna Rebound to New Highs

Meet Josefa Muñoz, Ph.D. Student

Last updated by Pacific Islands Regional Office on August 28, 2024

The University of Chicago The Law School

Federal criminal justice clinic—significant achievements for 2023-24.

The Federal Criminal Justice Clinic is the nation’s first legal clinic devoted to representing indigent clients charged with federal felonies, pursuing impact litigation through criminal cases in federal court, and spearheading systemic change within the federal criminal system to combat racial, economic, and other inequities. Professor Alison Siegler, the Clinic’s Founding Director, and Professor Judith Miller work together with students to advocate in these areas.

Freedom Denied Systemic Reform Project

Students working with Professor Siegler on the FCJC’s Freedom Denied Project have continued to drive systemic change nationally in the area of federal pretrial jailing and detention, building on the Clinic’s study, Freedom Denied: How the Culture of Detention Created a Federal Jailing Crisis (2022). In this report, the FCJC identified a federal jailing crisis and presented hard data to judges and other stakeholders about various ways in which people’s rights are violated during federal bail hearings. Since then, the FCJC has been pulling every possible lever to address this crisis, reduce federal jailing rates, and reduce the accompanying racial disparities.

In ten of the federal courts where the FCJC engaged in district-specific interventions, federal jailing rates decreased by fifteen percent on average. Over the five years since our work began, federal jailing rates have decreased by five percent nationwide. While it is difficult to know what part of the decrease is attributable to the Clinic’s efforts, many judges and policymakers have informed Professor Siegler that the Clinic’s work is fundamentally reshaping how the federal system addresses pretrial detention and release.

This year, the FCJC distributed a bound hard copy of our 300-page Freedom Denied report to 700 federal judges, including every Chief US District Court Judge and every US Magistrate Judge in the country who makes pretrial jailing decisions. We received many letters and emails from judges nationwide, thanking us and reflecting on our report as an excellent and practical resource for the judiciary. (The printing, binding, and mailing of the report was made possible by an additional and very generous gift from the Astor Street Foundation.)

In our report, the FCJC was the first to identify a massive access-to-justice problem, and our interventions on that issue are creating monumental change. Specifically, our investigation revealed that in one-quarter of the federal courts in this country, judges regularly detain people in jail without lawyers. This is a clear violation of federal laws that require the appointment of counsel during the first court hearing, known as the initial appearance.

The FCJC advocated to the Department of Justice and the Judicial Conference of the United States, and they responded by working with us to rectify the access-to-counsel problem. In 2023, the DOJ issued a new directive requiring federal prosecutors to recognize the statutory right to counsel. After that, FCJC students and Professor Siegler conducted an extensive additional investigation to identify the federal courts where the right-to-counsel crisis is most acute, and approached the Judicial Conference with our findings. In response, Judicial Conference committees ultimately issued a directive in March 2024 requiring federal judges to appoint counsel to represent every indigent defendant during their initial appearance hearing, stating: “Courts that do not currently ensure that every defendant has active representation by counsel during the initial appearance must comply with the governing statute and rules.” This is an enormous milestone.

While awaiting this directive, Professor Siegler published an op-ed in USA Today to further educate stakeholders about the crisis and spread nationwide attention and awareness, explaining: “Our [Clinic’s] findings document the shocking number of people denied public defenders at their first bail hearing, which virtually guarantees that they will be jailed rather than released home to their families.” In the wake of these changes, we have been heartened to learn that federal courts that for decades had an entrenched practice of locking defendants in jail without lawyers are now regularly appointing counsel.

The Clinic engaged in additional systemic change efforts to address the broader federal jailing crisis this year, including:

• Widely distributing the Clinic’s template motions for pretrial release via the Westlaw Forms database to ensure that federal criminal defense attorneys have access to effective legal tools.
• The centerpiece of this year’s trainings was a presentation at the Seventh Circuit Judicial Conference, an upcoming panel at the Tenth Circuit Judicial Conference, and a multi-day national bail workshop for Federal Public Defenders.
• Additional speeches included presentations at the National Association of Pretrial Services Agencies 50 th Annual Conference and Training, a presentation at the annual national conference of the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC), and a speech at a conference organized by the Honorable Salvador Mendoza of the US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.

Retroactivity Project

Under Professor Judith Miller’s leadership, FCJC student teams represented four incarcerated clients in motions to have their sentences reduced under the newly passed Amendment 821 to the Sentencing Guidelines. The Sentencing Commission issued the retroactive Amendment in light of new data showing that two components of the Guidelines overstated certain individuals’ risk of recidivism. Under this Amendment, incarcerated individuals can ask the court to reduce their sentences to the low-end of their new, amended Guideline range. Once the court determines that the individual is eligible for a reduction, it applies the usual factors under the sentencing statute, 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a), to determine whether a reduction is warranted.

The FCJC recognized that the Clinic could play an important role by representing clients who might be eligible for release after the change in the law. In this project, Clinic students used their outstanding research, writing, and investigation skills to help individuals in need of counsel push novel legal and factual issues posed by the new Amendment. As of early July 2024, one client has been released, one client’s sentence has been reduced, and two cases are still pending.

Two of the Clinic’s four cases were ultimately uncontested. Of the uncontested cases, our released client is now home with her family, after receiving a twenty-one-month sentence reduction. This was an especially sweet victory as the Clinic had previously represented this client at trial in 2019. In the second case, student advocacy persuaded the government to agree to the reduction. If granted, the motion will reduce our client’s sentence by nearly a year, to his mandatory minimum sentence.

As for the two contested pending cases, both present fascinating and important legal issues. In the first, students successfully persuaded the Court to grant the client an eighteen-month sentence reduction. This victory was an uphill battle. Both Probation and the government initially concluded that the client was ineligible for relief. Students nonetheless persuaded Probation to change its position, and the government then conceded eligibility after reading the students’ motion.

The student team argued that our client’s sentence should be reduced to account for dramatic changes in sentencing law that robbed him of the benefit of his earlier bargain, among other things. Years before we began representing him, our client received an agreed 150-month sentence in exchange for the government dropping additional charges that could have led to a thirty-year mandatory minimum sentence. The student team argued that our client was eligible for relief under a recent Supreme Court case, contrary to the government’s claims. Clinic students extensively researched the legal issues, documented our client’s post-sentencing success in prison, worked closely with our Clinic’s social worker, delved into the social science of age and recidivism, and drafted the motion.

After reading the Clinic’s briefing, the Court quickly concluded that our client deserved a sentence reduction, highlighting the same points the students raised in their briefing. Among other things, the Court observed that our client had obtained jobs requiring “technical expertise and trust,” and “demonstrate[d] a strong network of family and friends who vouch for his character.” The team looks forward to celebrating our client’s freedom once he is released.

The second contested case raises a circuit split over our client’s eligibility for relief in the first place. Our motion argues that Seventh Circuit case law conclusively entitles our client to relief. The § 3553(a) factors likewise support reducing our client’s grossly unfair sentence—he was sentenced twice for the very same conduct. The original federal judge intended for our client to serve a 196-month sentence, but a subsequent state sentence added an unexpected twenty-four months on top of that. Clinic students investigated and documented the double-sentencing, strategized over how to frame the issue, researched the circuit split, and drafted the motion. If the Clinic’s motion is granted, our client will receive a twenty-five-month sentence reduction.

Advocacy in Stash House Cases

FCJC students under Professor Siegler’s supervision partnered with a team led by Professor Erica Zunkel and students in the Criminal and Juvenile Justice Clinic in filing a motion for compassionate release on behalf of a client currently serving a thirty-five-year sentence in a fake stash house case. This case builds on the Clinic’s prior federal impact litigation alleging unconstitutional racial discrimination in stash house cases in the Chicago area. The FCJC previously co-counseled cases on behalf of forty-three clients, nearly all of whom were released with time-served sentences. Additional people ensnared in the Chicago stash house operations were subsequently released thanks to compassionate release litigation led by Professor Zunkel.

Given these prior successes, the Clinics’ current client is one of just two people still serving a decades-long sentence for the stash house operation, which the federal government has now repudiated. He has already served seventeen years in federal prison. We are requesting his immediate release.

The Drugs on the Docket Podcast recently featured two episodes about the FCJC’s contributions to the stash house litigation. In Episode one , Professor Siegler discusses the Clinic’s pretrial litigation and how we ultimately helped shut down this racially discriminatory policing tactic nationwide. In Episode two , Professor Zunkel discusses the subsequent compassionate release litigation she led, which convinced judges to release eight other clients, most of whom were serving twenty-five-year sentences, sparing each approximately ten additional years in prison.